
FirePro 3D V5800 vs Quadro FX 5800

FirePro 3D V5800
Popular choices:

Quadro FX 5800
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The FirePro 3D V5800 is positioned at rank 264 and the Quadro FX 5800 is on rank 392, so the FirePro 3D V5800 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar FirePro 3D V5800
Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 5800
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FirePro 3D V5800 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.7% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro FX 5800 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | FirePro 3D V5800 | Quadro FX 5800 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.7%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+300%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The FirePro 3D V5800 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the FirePro 3D V5800 holds the technical lead. Priced at $30 (vs $40), it costs 25% less, resulting in a 35.6% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | FirePro 3D V5800 | Quadro FX 5800 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+35.6%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($30) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($40) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of FirePro 3D V5800 and Quadro FX 5800

FirePro 3D V5800
The FirePro 3D V5800 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in April 26 2010. It features the TeraScale 2 architecture. The core clock speed is 690 MHz. It has 800 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 74W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,232 points. Launch price was $479.

Quadro FX 5800
The Quadro FX 5800 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 11 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 610 MHz. It has 240 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 189W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,211 points. Launch price was $3,499.
Graphics Performance
The FirePro 3D V5800 scores 1,232 and the Quadro FX 5800 reaches 1,211 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FirePro 3D V5800 is built on TeraScale 2 while the Quadro FX 5800 uses Tesla 2.0, both on 40 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 800 (FirePro 3D V5800) vs 240 (Quadro FX 5800). Raw compute: 1.104 TFLOPS (FirePro 3D V5800) vs 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 5800).
| Feature | FirePro 3D V5800 | Quadro FX 5800 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,232+2% | 1,211 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 800+233% | 240 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.104 TFLOPS+77% | 0.6221 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 32+100% |
| TMUs | 40 | 80+100% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FirePro 3D V5800 | Quadro FX 5800 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The FirePro 3D V5800 comes with 1 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro FX 5800 has 4 GB. The Quadro FX 5800 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | FirePro 3D V5800 | Quadro FX 5800 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB | 4 GB+300% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The FirePro 3D V5800 draws 74W versus the Quadro FX 5800's 189W — a 87.5% difference. The FirePro 3D V5800 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro 3D V5800) vs 350W (Quadro FX 5800). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | FirePro 3D V5800 | Quadro FX 5800 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 74W-61% | 189W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 229mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 90°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 16.6+159% | 6.4 |
Value Analysis
The FirePro 3D V5800 launched at $479 MSRP and currently averages $30, while the Quadro FX 5800 launched at $3499 and now averages $40. The FirePro 3D V5800 costs 25% less ($10 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 41.1 (FirePro 3D V5800) vs 30.3 (Quadro FX 5800) — the FirePro 3D V5800 offers 35.6% better value. The FirePro 3D V5800 is the newer GPU (2010 vs 2008).
| Feature | FirePro 3D V5800 | Quadro FX 5800 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $479-86% | $3499 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $30-25% | $40 |
| Performance per Dollar | 41.1+36% | 30.3 |
| Codename | Juniper | GT200B |
| Release | April 26 2010 | November 11 2008 |
| Ranking | #780 | #815 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
















