Radeon RX 7600M XT vs Quadro FX 3700

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 3700 with Radeon RX 7600M XT, including specs and performance data.

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

7600M XT outperforms FX 3700 by a whopping 3757% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1206170
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.8822.17
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026)
GPU code nameG92Navi 33
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date8 January 2008 (18 years ago)4 January 2023 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,599 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 cores1122048
Core clock speed500 MHz1280 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2469 MHz
Number of transistors754 million13,300 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)78 Watt120 Watt
Texture fill rate28.00316.0
Floating-point processing power0.28 TFLOPS20.23 TFLOPS
ROPs1664
TMUs56128
Ray Tracing Coresno data32
L0 Cacheno data512 KB
L1 Cacheno data512 KB
L2 Cache64 KB2 MB
L3 Cacheno data32 MB

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 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length267 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinNone

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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount512 MB8 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth51.2 GB/s288.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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-VideoPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.7
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.12.2
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA1.1-

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
RX 7600M XT 34.33
+3757%

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
RX 7600M XT 14301
+3755%
Samples: 433

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 HD3−4
−97.4%
116
1440p1−260
+5900%
4K0−133

Cost per frame, $

1080p533.00no data
1440p1599.00no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 186 186
Counter-Strike 2 331 331
Cyberpunk 2077 116 116
Resident Evil 4 Remake 145 145

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 140 140
Battlefield 5 120−130 120−130
Counter-Strike 2 317 317
Cyberpunk 2077 96 96
Far Cry 5 127 127
Fortnite 150−160 150−160
Forza Horizon 4 245 245
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140 130−140
Valorant 210−220 210−220

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 85 85
Battlefield 5 120−130 120−130
Counter-Strike 2 164 164
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 81 81
Dota 2 140−150 140−150
Far Cry 5 127 127
Fortnite 150−160 150−160
Forza Horizon 4 237 237
Grand Theft Auto V 133 133
Metro Exodus 98 98
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140 130−140
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 186 186
Valorant 210−220 210−220

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 120−130 120−130
Cyberpunk 2077 74 74
Dota 2 140−150 140−150
Far Cry 5 120 120
Forza Horizon 4 180 180
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140 130−140
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 105 105
Valorant 210−220 210−220

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 150−160 150−160

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 84 84
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 240−250 240−250
Grand Theft Auto V 70 70
Metro Exodus 58 58
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 240−250 240−250

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 90−95 90−95
Cyberpunk 2077 48 48
Far Cry 5 102 102
Forza Horizon 4 142 142
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 76 76

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 90−95 90−95

4K
High

Atomic Heart 27−30 27−30
Counter-Strike 2 21 21
Grand Theft Auto V 74 74
Metro Exodus 35 35
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 53 53
Valorant 210−220 210−220

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 55−60 55−60
Counter-Strike 2 25 25
Cyberpunk 2077 22 22
Dota 2 100−110 100−110
Far Cry 5 51 51
Forza Horizon 4 90 90
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45 40−45

4K
Epic

Fortnite 40−45 40−45

This is how FX 3700 and RX 7600M XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 7600M XT is 3767% faster in 1080p
  • RX 7600M XT is 5900% faster in 1440p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.89 34.33
Recency 8 January 2008 4 January 2023
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 78 Watt 120 Watt

FX 3700 has 35% lower power consumption.

RX 7600M XT, on the other hand, has a 3757% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 91% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 7600M XT 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 Radeon RX 7600M XT is a notebook 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.


4.1 25 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 98 votes

Rate Radeon RX 7600M XT 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 Radeon RX 7600M XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.