Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics vs Quadro FX 2700M

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking1203not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.02no data
Power efficiency1.05no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Gen. 5 Arrandale (2010)
GPU code nameG94GMA HD
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date14 August 2008 (17 years ago)10 January 2010 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$99.95 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

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 cores4812
Core clock speed530 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors505 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology65 nm45 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate12.72no data
Floating-point processing power0.1272 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs24no data
L2 Cache64 KBno data

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).

Laptop sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-HEno data

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 typeGDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amount512 MBno data
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed799 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth51.14 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.1 (10_0)10
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL3.3no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA1.1-

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

FX 2700M 2799
+841%
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics 298

Pros & cons summary


Recency 14 August 2008 10 January 2010
Chip lithography 65 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 35 Watt

Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics has an age advantage of 1 year, a 44% more advanced lithography process, and 86% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Quadro FX 2700M and Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro FX 2700M is a mobile workstation graphics card while Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics is a mobile workstation one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.3 10 votes

Rate Quadro FX 2700M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 146 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 2700M or Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.