Quadro 3000M vs Quadro FX 3700

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
FX 3000 FX 3000G FX 3400 FX 3450 FX 3500 FX 3700 FX 3800 FX 4700 X2 Plex 2100 D4 VX 200
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
1000M 2000M 3000M 3000M X2 4000M 5000M 5010M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 3700 with Quadro 3000M, including specs and performance data.

FX 3700
2008, $1,599
512 MB GDDR3, 78 Watt
0.89

3000M outperforms FX 3700 by a whopping 171% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
FX 3700 FX 3700
Quadro 3000M Quadro 3000M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1205906
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.11
Power efficiency0.882.49
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameG92GF104
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date8 January 2008 (18 years ago)22 February 2011 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,599 $398.96

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

FX 3700 and Quadro 3000M have a nearly equal value for money.

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 cores112240
Core clock speed500 MHz450 MHz
Number of transistors754 million1,950 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)78 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate28.0018.00
Floating-point processing power0.28 TFLOPS0.432 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs5640
L1 Cacheno data320 KB
L2 Cache64 KB512 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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Length267 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount512 MB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz625 MHz
Memory bandwidth51.2 GB/s80 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model4.05.1
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.12.1

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.

FX 3700 0.89
Quadro 3000M 2.41
+171%

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.

FX 3700 371
Samples: 285
Quadro 3000M 1004
+171%
Samples: 607

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 HD18−20
−183%
51
+183%

Cost per frame, $

1080p88.83
−1036%
7.82
+1036%
  • Quadro 3000M has 1036% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
High

Atomic Heart 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
Ultra

Dota 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how FX 3700 and Quadro 3000M compete in popular games:

  • Quadro 3000M is 183% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 54 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 0.89 2.41
Recency 8 January 2008 22 February 2011
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 78 Watt 75 Watt

Quadro 3000M has a 171% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 63% more advanced lithography process, and 4% lower power consumption.

The Quadro 3000M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3700 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 3700 is a workstation graphics card while Quadro 3000M 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.

FX 3700 Quadro FX 3700
vs
FX 1700 Quadro FX 1700
Quadro 3000M Quadro 3000M
vs
K2000M Quadro K2000M
FX 3700 Quadro FX 3700
vs
FX 580 Quadro FX 580
Tesla S1075 Tesla S1075
vs
GTX 295 Single PCB GTX 295 Single PCB
Tesla S1075 Tesla S1075
vs
Apple M4 Max 32-Core GPU M4 Max 32-Core GPU
FX 4700 X2 FX 4700 X2
vs
R5 230 R5 230
FX 4700 X2 FX 4700 X2
vs
7900 GT 7900 GT
FX 3700 FX 3700
vs
K1100M K1100M
FX 3700 FX 3700
vs
R9 255 OEM R9 255 OEM
FX 3700 FX 3700
vs
Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G1 Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G1
FX 3700 FX 3700
vs
RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB
VX 200 VX 200
vs
GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q
NVS 290 NVS 290
vs
ATI Mobility HD 5750 Mobility HD 5750

Community ratings

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

4.1 25 votes

Rate Quadro FX 3700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 51 votes

Rate Quadro 3000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 3700 or Quadro 3000M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.