Quadro CX vs GeForce GT 1010
Quadro CX
Popular choices:
GeForce GT 1010
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 Quadro CX is positioned at rank 383 and the GeForce GT 1010 is on rank 98, so the GeForce GT 1010 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro CX
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GT 1010
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce GT 1010 is significantly newer (2021 vs 2008). The GeForce GT 1010 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro CX lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GT 1010 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.6% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro CX offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Quadro CX | GeForce GT 1010 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.6%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.6%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | Pascal (2016−2021) (14nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+700%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GT 1010 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $70 versus $500 for the Quadro CX, it costs 86% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 633.1% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro CX | GeForce GT 1010 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+633.1%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($500) | ✅More affordable ($70) |
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 Quadro CX and GeForce GT 1010
Quadro CX
The Quadro CX is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 11 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 602 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 947 points. Launch price was $1,999.
GeForce GT 1010
The GeForce GT 1010 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 13 2021. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1228 MHz to 1468 MHz. It has 256 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 972 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro CX scores 947 and the GeForce GT 1010 reaches 972 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro CX is built on Tesla 2.0 while the GeForce GT 1010 uses Pascal, both on 55 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 192 (Quadro CX) vs 256 (GeForce GT 1010). Raw compute: 0.4623 TFLOPS (Quadro CX) vs 0.7516 TFLOPS (GeForce GT 1010).
| Feature | Quadro CX | GeForce GT 1010 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 947 | 972+3% |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | Pascal |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 192 | 256+33% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.4623 TFLOPS | 0.7516 TFLOPS+63% |
| ROPs | 24+50% | 16 |
| TMUs | 64+300% | 16 |
| L2 Cache | 192 KB | 256 KB+33% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro CX | GeForce GT 1010 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Quadro CX comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GT 1010 has 512 MB. The Quadro CX offers 700% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 192 KB (Quadro CX) vs 256 KB (GeForce GT 1010) — the GeForce GT 1010 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro CX | GeForce GT 1010 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+700% | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 192 KB | 256 KB+33% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 11.1 (10_0) (Quadro CX) vs 12 (12_1) (GeForce GT 1010). Vulkan: N/A vs 1.4. OpenGL: 3.3 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | Quadro CX | GeForce GT 1010 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12 (12_1)+8% |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6+39% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (Quadro CX) vs None (GeForce GT 1010). Decoder: PureVideo HD vs VP8 (Feature Set H). Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Quadro CX) vs H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP8,VP9,MPEG-2,VC-1 (GeForce GT 1010).
| Feature | Quadro CX | GeForce GT 1010 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | None |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD | VP8 (Feature Set H) |
| Codecs | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 | H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP8,VP9,MPEG-2,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro CX draws 150W versus the GeForce GT 1010's 30W — a 133.3% difference. The GeForce GT 1010 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro CX) vs 300W (GeForce GT 1010). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None. Card length: 267mm vs 147mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 80 vs 75.
| Feature | Quadro CX | GeForce GT 1010 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 150W | 30W-80% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 300W-14% |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | None |
| Length | 267mm | 147mm |
| Height | 111mm | 69mm |
| Slots | 2 | 1-50% |
| Temp (Load) | 80 | 75-6% |
| Perf/Watt | 6.3 | 32.4+414% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro CX launched at $1999 MSRP and currently averages $500, while the GeForce GT 1010 launched at $70 and now averages $70. The GeForce GT 1010 costs 86% less ($430 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 1.9 (Quadro CX) vs 13.9 (GeForce GT 1010) — the GeForce GT 1010 offers 631.6% better value. The GeForce GT 1010 is the newer GPU (2021 vs 2008).
| Feature | Quadro CX | GeForce GT 1010 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1999 | $70-96% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $500 | $70-86% |
| Performance per Dollar | 1.9 | 13.9+632% |
| Codename | GT200B | GP108 |
| Release | November 11 2008 | January 13 2021 |
| Ranking | #901 | #895 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro CX and GeForce GT 1010
