GeForce FX 5700 vs GTX 1080 Ti

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1080 Ti and GeForce FX 5700, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 1080 Ti
2017
11 GB GDDR5X, 250 Watt
48.17
+48070%

GTX 1080 Ti outperforms FX 5700 by a whopping 48070% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking701448
Place by popularity41not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation20.87no data
Power efficiency13.200.27
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Rankine (2003−2005)
GPU code nameGP102NV36
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date10 March 2017 (7 years ago)23 October 2003 (21 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$699 no data

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 cores3584no data
Core clock speed1481 MHz425 MHz
Boost clock speed1582 MHzno data
Number of transistors11,800 million82 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt25 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature91 °Cno data
Texture fill rate354.41.700
Floating-point processing power11.34 TFLOPSno data
ROPs884
TMUs2244

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16AGP 8x
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slot1-slot
Recommended system power (PSU)600 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinNone
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR5XDDR
Maximum RAM amount11 GB128 MB
Memory bus width352 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1376 MHz250 MHz
Memory bandwidth484.4 GB/s16 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
G-SYNC support+-

Supported technologies

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

GPU Boost3.0no data
Ansel+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)9.0a
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.51.5 (2.1)
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA+-

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.

GTX 1080 Ti 48.17
+48070%
FX 5700 0.10

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.

GTX 1080 Ti 18562
+46305%
FX 5700 40

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 HD132-0−1
1440p83-0−1
4K66-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p5.30no data
1440p8.42no data
4K10.59no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 85−90 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 100 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 80−85 0−1
Battlefield 5 162 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 95−100 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 85−90 0−1
Far Cry 5 122 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 110−120 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 293 0−1
Hitman 3 100−110 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 190−200 0−1
Metro Exodus 144 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 100−110 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 215 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 145 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 80−85 0−1
Battlefield 5 147 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 95−100 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 85−90 0−1
Far Cry 5 96 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 59 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 284 0−1
Hitman 3 100−110 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 190−200 0−1
Metro Exodus 144 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 100−110 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 196 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 95−100 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 71 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 80−85 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 81 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 85−90 0−1
Far Cry 5 73 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 120 0−1
Hitman 3 100−110 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 153 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 167 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 98 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140 0−1

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 121 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 108 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 86 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 62 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 62 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45 0−1
Far Cry 5 55 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 265 0−1
Hitman 3 65−70 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 118 0−1
Metro Exodus 88 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 123 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 75−80 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 210−220 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 98 0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 56 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 69 0−1
Hitman 3 40−45 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 200−210 0−1
Metro Exodus 60 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 72 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 37 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20 0−1
Far Cry 5 31 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 75 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 72 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 24−27 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 49 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 48.17 0.10
Recency 10 March 2017 23 October 2003
Maximum RAM amount 11 GB 128 MB
Chip lithography 16 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 25 Watt

GTX 1080 Ti has a 48070% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 8700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 712.5% more advanced lithography process.

FX 5700, on the other hand, has 900% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce FX 5700 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.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5700
GeForce FX 5700

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.


4.3 9971 vote

Rate GeForce GTX 1080 Ti on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 71 vote

Rate GeForce FX 5700 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.