GeForce GT 710 vs FirePro V7900
Aggregate performance score
We've compared FirePro V7900 with GeForce GT 710, including specs and performance data.
V7900 outperforms GT 710 by a whopping 268% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 678 | 1043 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 87 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.04 |
| Power efficiency | 2.81 | 6.03 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 3 (2010−2013) | Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015) |
| GPU code name | Cayman | GK208 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 24 May 2011 (15 years ago) | 27 March 2014 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $34.99 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 1280 | 192 |
| Core clock speed | 725 MHz | 954 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 2,640 million | 1,020 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 151 Watt | 19 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | no data | 95 °C |
| Texture fill rate | 58.00 | 15.26 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.856 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 32 | 8 |
| TMUs | 80 | 16 |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB | 16 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Bus support | PCIe 2.1 x16 | PCI Express 2.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x8 |
| Length | 279 mm | 145 mm |
| Height | no data | 2.713" (6.9 cm) |
| Width | 1-slot | 1-slot |
| Form factor | full height / full length | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | None |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1250 MHz | 1.8 GB/s |
| Memory bandwidth | 160 GB/s | 14.4 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | 4x DisplayPort | Dual Link DVI-DHDMIVGA |
| Multi monitor support | no data | 3 displays |
| HDMI | - | + |
| HDCP | - | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
| StereoOutput3D | + | - |
| DisplayPort count | 4 | no data |
| Dual-link DVI support | + | - |
| Audio input for HDMI | no data | Internal |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| 3D Vision | - | + |
| PureVideo | - | + |
| PhysX | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 6.5 (5.1) |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.175 |
| CUDA | - | + |
Synthetic benchmarks
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 27−30 | 8
−70.4%
|
| 1440p | 10−12 | 3
−70%
|
| 4K | 24−27 | 7
−70.8%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 4.37 |
| 1440p | no data | 11.66 |
| 4K | no data | 5.00 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Atomic Heart | 4−5 | 4−5 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2 | 1−2 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 3−4 |
Full HD
Medium
| Atomic Heart | 4−5 | 4−5 |
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3 | 2−3 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2 | 1−2 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 3−4 |
| Far Cry 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Fortnite | 5−6 | 5−6 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9 | 8−9 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11 | 10−11 |
| Valorant | 35−40 | 35−40 |
Full HD
High
| Atomic Heart | 4−5 | 4−5 |
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3 | 2−3 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2 | 1−2 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 30−35 | 30−35 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 3−4 |
| Dota 2 | 20 | 20 |
| Far Cry 5 | 4 | 4 |
| Far Cry 6 | 1−2 | 1−2 |
| Fortnite | 5−6 | 5−6 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9 | 8−9 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 9 | 9 |
| Metro Exodus | 3 | 3 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11 | 10−11 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5 | 5 |
| Valorant | 35−40 | 35−40 |
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3 | 2−3 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 3−4 |
| Dota 2 | 18 | 18 |
| Far Cry 5 | 4 | 4 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9 | 8−9 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11 | 10−11 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3 | 3 |
| Valorant | 35−40 | 35−40 |
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 5−6 | 5−6 |
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5 | 4−5 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 10−11 | 10−11 |
| Far Cry 6 | 2−3 | 2−3 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16 | 14−16 |
| Valorant | 10−12 | 10−12 |
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 1−2 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4 | 3−4 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3 | 2−3 |
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3 | 2−3 |
4K
High
| Atomic Heart | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 6 | 5−6 | 5−6 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16 | 14−16 |
| Valorant | 9−10 | 9−10 |
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 7 | 7 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3 | 2−3 |
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3 | 2−3 |
This is how FirePro V7900 and GT 710 compete in popular games:
- FirePro V7900 is 238% faster in 1080p
- FirePro V7900 is 233% faster in 1440p
- FirePro V7900 is 243% faster in 4K
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 51 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 5.41 | 1.47 |
| Recency | 24 May 2011 | 27 March 2014 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 151 Watt | 19 Watt |
FirePro V7900 has a 268% higher aggregate performance score.
GT 710, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 30% more advanced lithography process, and 87% lower power consumption.
The FirePro V7900 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 710 in performance tests.
Be aware that FirePro V7900 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GT 710 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
