Quadro CX vs Radeon HD 4850
Quadro CX
Popular choices:
Radeon HD 4850
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 Radeon HD 4850 is on rank 237, so the Radeon HD 4850 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 Radeon HD 4850
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro CX is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.1% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (4 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon HD 4850.
| Insight | Quadro CX | Radeon HD 4850 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.1%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / TeraScale (2005−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | Standard Size (246mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon HD 4850 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon HD 4850 holds the technical lead. Priced at $199 (vs $500), it costs 60% less, resulting in a 151% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro CX | Radeon HD 4850 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+151%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($500) | ✅More affordable ($199) |
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 Radeon HD 4850
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.
Radeon HD 4850
The Radeon HD 4850 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 25 2008. It features the TeraScale architecture. The core clock speed is 625 MHz. It has 800 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 110W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 946 points. Launch price was $199.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro CX scores 947 and the Radeon HD 4850 reaches 946 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro CX is built on Tesla 2.0 while the Radeon HD 4850 uses TeraScale, both on a 55 nm process. Shader units: 192 (Quadro CX) vs 800 (Radeon HD 4850). Raw compute: 0.4623 TFLOPS (Quadro CX) vs 1 TFLOPS (Radeon HD 4850).
| Feature | Quadro CX | Radeon HD 4850 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 947 | 946 |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | TeraScale |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 192 | 800+317% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.4623 TFLOPS | 1 TFLOPS+116% |
| ROPs | 24+50% | 16 |
| TMUs | 64+60% | 40 |
| L2 Cache | 192 KB | 256 KB+33% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro CX | Radeon HD 4850 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Quadro CX comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon HD 4850 has 2 GB. The Quadro CX offers 100% 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 (Radeon HD 4850) — the Radeon HD 4850 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro CX | Radeon HD 4850 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+100% | 2 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 10.1 (Radeon HD 4850). Vulkan: N/A vs N/A. OpenGL: 3.3 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | Quadro CX | Radeon HD 4850 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0)+10% | 10.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 3.3 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (Quadro CX) vs None (Radeon HD 4850). Decoder: PureVideo HD vs UVD 2.2. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Quadro CX) vs MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 (Radeon HD 4850).
| Feature | Quadro CX | Radeon HD 4850 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | None |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD | UVD 2.2 |
| Codecs | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 | MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro CX draws 150W versus the Radeon HD 4850's 110W — a 30.8% difference. The Radeon HD 4850 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro CX) vs 450W (Radeon HD 4850). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin. Card length: 267mm vs 246mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 80 vs 95.
| Feature | Quadro CX | Radeon HD 4850 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 150W | 110W-27% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-22% | 450W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 1x 6-pin |
| Length | 267mm | 246mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 1-50% |
| Temp (Load) | 80-16% | 95 |
| Perf/Watt | 6.3 | 8.6+37% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro CX launched at $1999 MSRP and currently averages $500, while the Radeon HD 4850 launched at $199 and now averages $199. The Radeon HD 4850 costs 60.2% less ($301 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 1.9 (Quadro CX) vs 4.8 (Radeon HD 4850) — the Radeon HD 4850 offers 152.6% better value.
| Feature | Quadro CX | Radeon HD 4850 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1999 | $199-90% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $500 | $199-60% |
| Performance per Dollar | 1.9 | 4.8+153% |
| Codename | GT200B | RV770 |
| Release | November 11 2008 | June 25 2008 |
| Ranking | #901 | #876 |
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 Radeon HD 4850
