Quadro FX 2500M vs GeForce 8700M GT

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated1211
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data0.87
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code nameG84G71
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date1 June 2007 (17 years ago)29 September 2005 (19 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$99.99

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 cores3232
Core clock speed625 MHz500 MHz
Boost clock speedno data500 MHz
Number of transistors289 million278 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)29 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate10.0012.00
Floating-point processing power0.08 TFLOPSno data
ROPs816
TMUs1624

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 sizelargelarge
InterfaceMXM-HEMXM-III

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 typeGDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount512 MB512 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz600 MHz
Memory bandwidth25.6 GB/s38.4 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

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model4.03.0
OpenGL3.32.1
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.1-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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



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.

8700M GT 124
FX 2500M 217
+75%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 June 2007 29 September 2005
Chip lithography 80 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 29 Watt 45 Watt

8700M GT has an age advantage of 1 year, a 12.5% more advanced lithography process, and 55.2% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 8700M GT and Quadro FX 2500M. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce 8700M GT is a notebook graphics card while Quadro FX 2500M is a mobile workstation one.


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.


NVIDIA GeForce 8700M GT
GeForce 8700M GT
NVIDIA Quadro FX 2500M
Quadro FX 2500M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.6 20 votes

Rate GeForce 8700M GT on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate Quadro FX 2500M 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.