Quadro FX 4800 vs Radeon R7 M270
When comparing Quadro FX 4800 and Radeon R7 M270, we look primarily at benchmarks and game tests. But it is not only about the numbers. Often you can find third-party models with higher clock speeds, better cooling, or a customizable RGB lighting. Not all of them will have all the features you need. Another thing to consider is the port selection. Most graphics cards have at least one DisplayPort and HDMI interface, but some monitors require DVI. Before you buy, check the TDP of the graphics card - this characteristic will help you estimate the consumption of the graphics card. You may even have to upgrade your PSU to meet its requirements. An important factor when choosing between Quadro FX 4800 and Radeon R7 M270 is the price. Does the additional cost justify the performance hit? Our comparison should help you make the right decision.
Quadro FX 4800
Radeon R7 M270 is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: Radeon R7 M270 is only used in laptop graphics. It has lower GPU clock speed compared to the desktop variant, which results in lower power consumption, but also 10-30% lower gaming performance. Check available laptop models with Radeon R7 M270 here:
Main Specs
| Quadro FX 4800 | Radeon R7 M270 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | |
| Memory type | GDDR3 | Not Listed |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1536 MB | |
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x S-Video | No outputs |
| Check Price |
- Quadro FX 4800 is connected by PCIe 2.0 x16, and Radeon R7 M270 uses PCIe 3.0 x8 interface.
- Quadro FX 4800 is used in Desktops, and Radeon R7 M270 - in Laptops.
- Quadro FX 4800 is build with Tesla 2.0 architecture, and Radeon R7 M270 - with GCN.
- Core clock speed of Radeon R7 M270 is 223 MHz higher, than Quadro FX 4800.
- Quadro FX 4800 is manufactured by 55 nm process technology, and Radeon R7 M270 - by 28 nm process technology.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | − |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 12−14 | 1−2 |
| medium / 1080p | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro FX 4800 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 1200% more, than Radeon R7 M270. | ||
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | − |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| medium / 1080p | 5−6 | − |
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | 40−45 | 45−50 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R7 M270 in Call of Duty: Warzone is 6% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| low / 768p | 120−130 | 60−65 |
| medium / 768p | 90−95 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 35−40 | 7−8 |
| QHD / 1440p | 21−24 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 16−18 | − |
| high / 768p | 65−70 | 16−18 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro FX 4800 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 185% more, than Radeon R7 M270. | ||
| low / 768p | 65−70 | 70−75 |
| ultra / 1080p | 18−20 | 0−1 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R7 M270 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 5% more, than Quadro FX 4800. | ||
| low / 768p | 75−80 | 45−50 |
| medium / 768p | 45−50 | 10−11 |
| ultra / 1080p | 20−22 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro FX 4800 in Dota 2 is 113% more, than Radeon R7 M270. | ||
| high / 1080p | 2−3 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 2−3 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 2−3 | − |
| low / 720p | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| medium / 1080p | 3−4 | − |
| high / 1080p | 10−11 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | − |
| QHD / 1440p | 3−4 | − |
| low / 720p | 50−55 | 21−24 |
| medium / 1080p | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro FX 4800 in Fortnite is 136% more, than Radeon R7 M270. | ||
| high / 1080p | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| QHD / 1440p | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| 4K / 2160p | 2−3 | − |
| low / 720p | 16−18 | 0−1 |
| medium / 1080p | 8−9 | 0−1 |
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 18−20 |
| high / 1080p | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| ultra / 1080p | 2−3 | − |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| medium / 720p | 35−40 | 12−14 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro FX 4800 in Grand Theft Auto V is 162% more, than Radeon R7 M270. | ||
| high / 1080p | 1−2 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | − |
| low / 720p | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| medium / 1080p | 3−4 | − |
| low / 768p | 90−95 | 75−80 |
| high / 1080p | 80−85 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 70−75 | − |
| medium / 1080p | 85−90 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro FX 4800 in Minecraft is 64% more, than Radeon R7 M270. | ||
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | − |
| low / 720p | 27−30 | 8−9 |
| medium / 1080p | 14−16 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro FX 4800 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 250% more, than Radeon R7 M270. | ||
| low / 720p | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| low / 768p | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| medium / 768p | 8−9 | − |
| high / 1080p | 4−5 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 3−4 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 1−2 | − |
| low / 768p | 70−75 | 45−50 |
| medium / 768p | 35−40 | 14−16 |
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| high / 768p | 30−35 | 12−14 |
| The average gaming FPS of Quadro FX 4800 in World of Tanks is 88% more, than Radeon R7 M270. | ||
Full Specs
| Quadro FX 4800 | Radeon R7 M270 | |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | GCN |
| Code name | GT200B | Opal XT / Mars |
| Type | Workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 11 November 2008 | 7 January 2014 |
| Pipelines | 192 | 384 |
| Core clock speed | 602 MHz | 825 MHz |
| Transistor count | 1,400 million | 950 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 28 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 38.53 | 19.80 |
| Floating-point performance | 462.3 gflops | 633.6 gflops |
| Length | 267 mm | |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz | |
| Memory bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 28.8 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | Not Listed |
| Vulkan | N/A | |
| CUDA | 1.3 | |
| FreeSync | + | |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
| HD3D | + | |
| PowerTune | + | |
| DualGraphics | + | |
| ZeroCore | + | |
| Switchable graphics | + | |
| Mantle | + | |
| Check Price |