Quadro FX 770M vs FirePro W7170M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro W7170M and Quadro FX 770M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

W7170M
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
8.22
+1342%

W7170M outperforms FX 770M by a whopping 1342% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking5131212
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.01
Power efficiency5.671.12
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameAmethystG96
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date2 October 2015 (9 years ago)14 August 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$527

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores204832
Core clock speed723 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million314 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate92.548.000
Floating-point processing power2.961 TFLOPS0.08 TFLOPS
ROPs328
TMUs12816

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 sizelargemedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-II
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB512 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth160.0 GB/s25.6 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
Eyefinity+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAcceleration+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model6.34.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA-1.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

W7170M 8.22
+1342%
FX 770M 0.57

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.

W7170M 3161
+1337%
FX 770M 220

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 HD54
+1700%
3−4
−1700%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data175.67

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+700%
2−3
−700%
Elden Ring 21−24
+2200%
1−2
−2200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+2500%
1−2
−2500%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+700%
2−3
−700%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+450%
6−7
−450%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+360%
5−6
−360%
Valorant 27−30
+1350%
2−3
−1350%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+2500%
1−2
−2500%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+700%
2−3
−700%
Dota 2 27−30
+1350%
2−3
−1350%
Elden Ring 21−24
+2200%
1−2
−2200%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+400%
7−8
−400%
Fortnite 45−50 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+450%
6−7
−450%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
+1350%
2−3
−1350%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+713%
8−9
−713%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+360%
5−6
−360%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+400%
5−6
−400%
Valorant 27−30
+1350%
2−3
−1350%
World of Tanks 120−130
+624%
16−18
−624%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+2500%
1−2
−2500%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+700%
2−3
−700%
Dota 2 27−30
+1350%
2−3
−1350%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+400%
7−8
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+450%
6−7
−450%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+713%
8−9
−713%
Valorant 27−30
+1350%
2−3
−1350%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 9−10 0−1
Elden Ring 10−12 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 10−11 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+1267%
3−4
−1267%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8 0−1
World of Tanks 55−60
+5800%
1−2
−5800%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+325%
4−5
−325%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
Metro Exodus 14−16 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Valorant 21−24
+320%
5−6
−320%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 2−3 0−1
Dota 2 18−20
+26.7%
14−16
−26.7%
Elden Ring 5−6 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+20%
14−16
−20%
Metro Exodus 4−5 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+2300%
1−2
−2300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+20%
14−16
−20%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Dota 2 18−20
+26.7%
14−16
−26.7%
Far Cry 5 10−11 0−1
Fortnite 8−9 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 9−10 0−1
Valorant 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%

This is how W7170M and FX 770M compete in popular games:

  • W7170M is 1700% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in World of Tanks, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the W7170M is 5800% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, W7170M surpassed FX 770M in all 33 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.22 0.57
Recency 2 October 2015 14 August 2008
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 35 Watt

W7170M has a 1342.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 132.1% more advanced lithography process.

FX 770M, on the other hand, has 185.7% lower power consumption.

The FirePro W7170M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 770M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD FirePro W7170M
FirePro W7170M
NVIDIA Quadro FX 770M
Quadro FX 770M

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.


3.2 13 votes

Rate FirePro W7170M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 31 vote

Rate Quadro FX 770M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.