Quadro FX 2700M vs GeForce GTS 350M

#ad
Buy
VS
#ad
Buy

Combined performance score

GTS 350M
1.05
+10.5%

GeForce GTS 350M outperforms Quadro FX 2700M by 11% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking10501076
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money0.040.02
ArchitectureGT2xx (2009−2012)G9x (2007−2010)
GPU code namen11e-ge1NB9E-GLM2
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date7 January 2010 (14 years old)14 August 2008 (15 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$99.95
Current price$230 $296 (3x MSRP)
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTS 350M has 100% better value for money than FX 2700M.

Technical specs

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores9648
CUDA cores96no data
Core clock speed500 MHz530 MHz
Number of transistors727 million505 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)28 Watt65 Watt
Texture fill rate16.0012.72
Floating-point performance240 gflops127.2 gflops
Gigaflops360no data

Size and compatibility

Information on GeForce GTS 350M and Quadro FX 2700M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizelargelarge
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfaceMXM-IIMXM-HE
SLI options+no data
MXM TypeMXM 3.0 Type-Bno data

Memory

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 amount1 GB1 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 2000 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth51.2 GB/s51.14 GB/s
Shared memory--

Video outputs and ports

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 ConnectorsDisplayPortLVDSHDMIDual Link DVISingle Link DVIVGANo outputs
HDMI+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data

Technologies

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

Power management8.0no data

API support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model4.14.0
OpenGL2.13.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+1.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

GTS 350M 1.05
+10.5%
FX 2700M 0.95

GeForce GTS 350M outperforms Quadro FX 2700M by 11% in our combined benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GTS 350M 407
+10%
FX 2700M 370

GeForce GTS 350M outperforms Quadro FX 2700M by 10% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 1−2 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 1−2 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2 0−1
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

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

  • in Far Cry 5, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTS 350M is 100% faster than the FX 2700M.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTS 350M is ahead in 6 tests (24%)
  • there's a draw in 19 tests (76%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 1.05 0.95
Recency 7 January 2010 14 August 2008
Chip lithography 40 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 28 Watt 65 Watt

The GeForce GTS 350M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 2700M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTS 350M is a notebook graphics card while Quadro FX 2700M 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.

User ratings

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


NVIDIA GeForce GTS 350M
GeForce GTS 350M
NVIDIA Quadro FX 2700M
Quadro FX 2700M

Similar GPU comparisons

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

User ratings: view and submit

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


3.6 7 votes

Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTS 350M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 9 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

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