FirePro W5170M vs Quadro FX 5800

In this comparison between FirePro W5170M and Quadro FX 5800 you will find out which graphics card performs better in today's games. Bear in mind that third-party versions may have more efficient cooling and higher clock speeds. This will increase cards' performance, though not by much. In addition to raw power you should also take into account the dimensions. Thicker models simply will not fit into a small mini-ITX case. The resolution of your monitor also affects the choice, since 4K gameplay requires a more powerful GPU. And don't overspend on the graphics card. Other parts of your build may also need to be upgraded, save some money for the CPU or power supply. For some people FirePro W5170M will be the best choice, for others Quadro FX 5800 will be their preference. Study the comparison tables below and make your choice.

FirePro W5170M Check Price

Quadro FX 5800 Check Price

FirePro W5170M is a Laptop Graphics Card

Note: FirePro W5170M 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 FirePro W5170M here:

FirePro W5170M Laptops

Main Specs

	FirePro W5170M	Quadro FX 5800
Power consumption (TDP)		189 Watt
Interface	MXM-A (3.0)	PCIe 2.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
Memory type	GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Display Connectors	No outputs	2x DVI, 1x DisplayPort, 1x S-Video
	Check Price	Check Price

FirePro W5170M is connected by MXM-A (3.0), and Quadro FX 5800 uses PCIe 2.0 x16 interface.
Quadro FX 5800 has 2 GB more memory, than FirePro W5170M.
FirePro W5170M is used in Mobile workstations, and Quadro FX 5800 - in Desktops.
FirePro W5170M is build with GCN architecture, and Quadro FX 5800 - with Tesla 2.0.
FirePro W5170M is manufactured by 28 nm process technology, and Quadro FX 5800 - by 55 nm process technology.
Memory clock speed of FirePro W5170M is 2900 MHz higher, than Quadro FX 5800.

Game benchmarks


high / 1080p	10−12	3−4
ultra / 1080p	6−7	1−2
QHD / 1440p	1−2	0−1
low / 720p	24−27	14−16
medium / 1080p	12−14	5−6
The average gaming FPS of FirePro W5170M in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 133% more, than Quadro FX 5800.
high / 1080p	18−20	8−9
ultra / 1080p	14−16	6−7
QHD / 1440p	1−2	0−1
low / 720p	35−40	20−22
medium / 1080p	18−20	8−9
The average gaming FPS of FirePro W5170M in Battlefield 5 is 100% more, than Quadro FX 5800.
low / 768p	45−50	45−50
high / 1080p	−	40−45
QHD / 1440p	0−1	0−1
FirePro W5170M and Quadro FX 5800 have the same average FPS in Call of Duty: Warzone.
low / 768p	170−180	120−130
medium / 768p	140−150	95−100
ultra / 1080p	75−80	45−50
QHD / 1440p	40−45	24−27
4K / 2160p	30−33	−
high / 768p	110−120	70−75
The average gaming FPS of FirePro W5170M in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 52% more, than Quadro FX 5800.
low / 768p	55−60	70−75
ultra / 1080p	30−33	20−22
medium / 1080p	45−50	40−45
FirePro W5170M and Quadro FX 5800 have the same average FPS in Cyberpunk 2077.
low / 768p	95−100	75−80
medium / 768p	75−80	55−60
ultra / 1080p	50−55	30−33
The average gaming FPS of FirePro W5170M in Dota 2 is 36% more, than Quadro FX 5800.
high / 1080p	12−14	4−5
ultra / 1080p	12−14	4−5
4K / 2160p	5−6	1−2
low / 720p	27−30	14−16
medium / 1080p	14−16	5−6
The average gaming FPS of FirePro W5170M in Far Cry 5 is 150% more, than Quadro FX 5800.
high / 1080p	20−22	12−14
ultra / 1080p	14−16	7−8
QHD / 1440p	−	4−5
low / 720p	80−85	55−60
medium / 1080p	35−40	16−18
The average gaming FPS of FirePro W5170M in Fortnite is 69% more, than Quadro FX 5800.
high / 1080p	18−20	7−8
ultra / 1080p	14−16	6−7
QHD / 1440p	5−6	0−1
low / 720p	35−40	21−24
medium / 1080p	21−24	9−10
The average gaming FPS of FirePro W5170M in Forza Horizon 4 is 109% more, than Quadro FX 5800.
low / 768p	70−75	50−55
medium / 768p	60−65	−
high / 1080p	21−24	9−10
ultra / 1080p	9−10	4−5
QHD / 1440p	0−1	0−1
medium / 720p	−	40−45
The average gaming FPS of FirePro W5170M in Grand Theft Auto V is 54% more, than Quadro FX 5800.
high / 1080p	7−8	2−3
ultra / 1080p	5−6	0−1
4K / 2160p	1−2	0−1
low / 720p	21−24	8−9
medium / 1080p	9−10	4−5
The average gaming FPS of FirePro W5170M in Metro Exodus is 160% more, than Quadro FX 5800.
low / 768p	100−110	85−90
high / 1080p	−	65−70
ultra / 1080p	90−95	−
medium / 1080p	100−105	−
The average gaming FPS of FirePro W5170M in Minecraft is 20% more, than Quadro FX 5800.
high / 1080p	18−20	−
ultra / 1080p	16−18	12−14
low / 720p	45−50	27−30
medium / 1080p	21−24	14−16
The average gaming FPS of FirePro W5170M in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 61% more, than Quadro FX 5800.
high / 1080p	12−14	6−7
ultra / 1080p	8−9	4−5
QHD / 1440p	0−1	0−1
low / 720p	20−22	8−9
medium / 1080p	12−14	8−9
The average gaming FPS of FirePro W5170M in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 85% more, than Quadro FX 5800.
low / 768p	40−45	18−20
medium / 768p	24−27	12−14
high / 1080p	14−16	6−7
ultra / 1080p	8−9	4−5
4K / 2160p	7−8	1−2
The average gaming FPS of FirePro W5170M in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 137% more, than Quadro FX 5800.
low / 768p	95−100	70−75
medium / 768p	55−60	35−40
ultra / 1080p	27−30	16−18
high / 768p	45−50	30−35
The average gaming FPS of FirePro W5170M in World of Tanks is 46% more, than Quadro FX 5800.

Full Specs

	FirePro W5170M	Quadro FX 5800
Architecture	GCN	Tesla 2.0
Code name	Tropo	GT200B
Type	Mobile workstation	Workstation
Release date	2 October 2015	11 November 2008
Pipelines	640	240
Core clock speed		610 MHz
Boost Clock	925 MHz
Transistor count	1,500 million	1,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	55 nm
Texture fill rate	37.00	48.80
Floating-point performance	1,184 gflops	622.1 gflops
Length		267 mm
Memory bus width	128 Bit	512 Bit
Memory clock speed	4500 MHz	1600 MHz
Memory bandwidth	72 GB/s	102.4 GB/s
Shared memory	-
DirectX	12 (11_1)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	5.1	4.0
OpenGL	4.6	3.3
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	N/A
CUDA		1.3
Laptop size	large
Eyefinity	+
AppAcceleration	+
	Check Price	Check Price

FirePro W5170M vs Quadro FX 5800

FirePro W5170M is a Laptop Graphics Card

Main Specs

Game benchmarks

Full Specs

Similar compares