Radeon R7 A265 vs Quadro FX 4800
Radeon R7 A265
Popular choices:
Quadro FX 4800
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 Radeon R7 A265 is positioned at rank 427 and the Quadro FX 4800 is on rank 379, so the Quadro FX 4800 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon R7 A265
Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 4800
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon R7 A265 is significantly newer (2014 vs 2008). The Radeon R7 A265 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro FX 4800 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro FX 4800 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.1% higher G3D Mark score and 200% more VRAM (2 GB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R7 A265.
| Insight | Radeon R7 A265 | Quadro FX 4800 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+200%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Quadro FX 4800 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro FX 4800 holds the technical lead. Priced at $80 (vs $149), it costs 46% less, resulting in a 88.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon R7 A265 | Quadro FX 4800 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+88.3%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($149) | ✅More affordable ($80) |
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 Radeon R7 A265 and Quadro FX 4800
Radeon R7 A265
The Radeon R7 A265 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 9 2014. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 725 MHz to 825 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 994 points.
Quadro FX 4800
The Quadro FX 4800 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: 1,005 points. Launch price was $1,799.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R7 A265 scores 994 and the Quadro FX 4800 reaches 1,005 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R7 A265 is built on GCN 1.0 while the Quadro FX 4800 uses Tesla 2.0, both on 28 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 384 (Radeon R7 A265) vs 192 (Quadro FX 4800). Raw compute: 0.6336 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 A265) vs 0.4623 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 4800).
| Feature | Radeon R7 A265 | Quadro FX 4800 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 994 | 1,005+1% |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 384+100% | 192 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6336 TFLOPS+37% | 0.4623 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 24+200% |
| TMUs | 24 | 64+167% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB+33% | 192 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R7 A265 | Quadro FX 4800 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Radeon R7 A265 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the Quadro FX 4800 has 2 GB. The Quadro FX 4800 offers 200% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (Radeon R7 A265) vs 192 KB (Quadro FX 4800) — the Radeon R7 A265 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon R7 A265 | Quadro FX 4800 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 1.5 GB+200% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB+33% | 192 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R7 A265 draws 30W versus the Quadro FX 4800's 150W — a 133.3% difference. The Radeon R7 A265 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon R7 A265) vs 350W (Quadro FX 4800). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Radeon R7 A265 | Quadro FX 4800 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 30W-80% | 150W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Slots | 0 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 75 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 33.1+394% | 6.7 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R7 A265 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $149, while the Quadro FX 4800 launched at $1799 and now averages $80. The Quadro FX 4800 costs 46.3% less ($69 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 6.7 (Radeon R7 A265) vs 12.6 (Quadro FX 4800) — the Quadro FX 4800 offers 88.1% better value. The Radeon R7 A265 is the newer GPU (2014 vs 2008).
| Feature | Radeon R7 A265 | Quadro FX 4800 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-92% | $1799 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $149 | $80-46% |
| Performance per Dollar | 6.7 | 12.6+88% |
| Codename | Opal | GT200B |
| Release | January 9 2014 | November 11 2008 |
| Ranking | #890 | #884 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon R7 A265 and Quadro FX 4800
