Quadro FX 5800 vs Quadro 2000 D
Quadro FX 5800
Popular choices:
Quadro 2000 D
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 FX 5800 is positioned at rank 392 and the Quadro 2000 D is on rank 288, so the Quadro 2000 D offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 5800
Performance Per Dollar Quadro 2000 D
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro 2000 D is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro FX 5800.
| Insight | Quadro FX 5800 | Quadro 2000 D |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.3%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / Fermi (2010−2014)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro 2000 D offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro 2000 D holds the technical lead. Priced at $35 (vs $40), it costs 13% less, resulting in a 16.9% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro FX 5800 | Quadro 2000 D |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+16.9%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($40) | ✅More affordable ($35) |
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 FX 5800 and Quadro 2000 D
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.
Quadro 2000 D
The Quadro 2000 D is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in October 5 2011. It features the Fermi architecture. The core clock speed is 625 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 62W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,239 points. Launch price was $599.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro FX 5800 scores 1,211 and the Quadro 2000 D reaches 1,239 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro FX 5800 is built on Tesla 2.0 while the Quadro 2000 D uses Fermi, both on 55 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 240 (Quadro FX 5800) vs 192 (Quadro 2000 D). Raw compute: 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 5800) vs 0.48 TFLOPS (Quadro 2000 D).
| Feature | Quadro FX 5800 | Quadro 2000 D |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,211 | 1,239+2% |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | Fermi |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 240+25% | 192 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6221 TFLOPS+30% | 0.48 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32+100% | 16 |
| TMUs | 80+150% | 32 |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro FX 5800 | Quadro 2000 D |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Quadro FX 5800 | Quadro 2000 D |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro FX 5800 draws 189W versus the Quadro 2000 D's 62W — a 101.2% difference. The Quadro 2000 D is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX 5800) vs 350W (Quadro 2000 D). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Quadro FX 5800 | Quadro 2000 D |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 189W | 62W-67% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 178mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | — | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 6.4 | 20.0+213% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro FX 5800 launched at $3499 MSRP and currently averages $40, while the Quadro 2000 D launched at $599 and now averages $35. The Quadro 2000 D costs 12.5% less ($5 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 30.3 (Quadro FX 5800) vs 35.4 (Quadro 2000 D) — the Quadro 2000 D offers 16.8% better value. The Quadro 2000 D is the newer GPU (2011 vs 2008).
| Feature | Quadro FX 5800 | Quadro 2000 D |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $3499 | $599-83% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $40 | $35-13% |
| Performance per Dollar | 30.3 | 35.4+17% |
| Codename | GT200B | GF106 |
| Release | November 11 2008 | October 5 2011 |
| Ranking | #815 | #892 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro FX 5800 and Quadro 2000 D
