Quadro FX 1300 vs GeForce GTX 970

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 970 with Quadro FX 1300, including specs and performance data.

GTX 970
2014, $329
4 GB GDDR5, 148 Watt
22.94
+28575%

GTX 970 outperforms FX 1300 by a whopping 28575% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking2691526
Place by popularity75not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation12.05no data
Power efficiency11.950.11
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Rankine (2003−2005)
GPU code nameGM204NV38
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date19 September 2014 (11 years ago)9 August 2004 (21 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$329 $599

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

GTX 970 and FX 1300 have a nearly equal value for money.

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores1664no data
Core clock speed1050 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speed1178 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,200 million135 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)148 Watt55 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature98 °Cno data
Texture fill rate122.52.800
Floating-point processing power3.92 TFLOPSno data
ROPs564
TMUs1048
L1 Cache624 KBno data
L2 Cache2 MBno data

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).

Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Length267 mm241 mm
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot1-slot
Recommended system power (PSU)500 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-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 typeGDDR5DDR
Maximum RAM amount4 GB128 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed7.0 GB/s275 MHz
Memory bandwidth224 GB/s17.6 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 ConnectorsDual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.22x DVI, 1x S-Video
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
G-SYNC support+-
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

GameStream+-
GeForce ShadowPlay+-
GPU Boost2.0no data
GameWorks+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)9.0a
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.42.1
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA+-

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.

GTX 970 22.94
+28575%
FX 1300 0.08

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 970 9639
+28250%
Samples: 51829
FX 1300 34
Samples: 9

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 HD81-0−1
1440p54-0−1
4K39-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.06no data
1440p6.09no data
4K8.44no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 130−140 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55 0−1

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 90−95 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 130−140 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55 0−1
Escape from Tarkov 90−95 0−1
Far Cry 5 75−80 0−1
Fortnite 110−120 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 90−95 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 70−75 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95 0−1
Valorant 160−170 0−1

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 90−95 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 130−140 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55 0−1
Dota 2 120−130 0−1
Escape from Tarkov 90−95 0−1
Far Cry 5 75−80 0−1
Fortnite 82 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 90−95 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 70−75 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 71 0−1
Metro Exodus 39 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 81 0−1
Valorant 160−170 0−1

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 48 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55 0−1
Dota 2 120−130 0−1
Escape from Tarkov 90−95 0−1
Far Cry 5 75−80 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 90−95 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 52 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 43 0−1
Valorant 160−170 0−1

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 60 0−1

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 50−55 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45 0−1
Metro Exodus 24 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 0−1
Valorant 200−210 0−1

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 65−70 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24 0−1
Escape from Tarkov 50−55 0−1
Far Cry 5 50−55 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 60−65 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40 0−1

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 55−60 0−1

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 21−24 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 46 0−1
Metro Exodus 13 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29 0−1
Valorant 130−140 0−1

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 20 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 21−24 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11 0−1
Dota 2 75−80 0−1
Escape from Tarkov 24−27 0−1
Far Cry 5 27−30 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 40−45 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18 0−1

4K
Epic

Fortnite 22 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 22.94 0.08
Recency 19 September 2014 9 August 2004
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 128 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 148 Watt 55 Watt

GTX 970 has a 28575% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 364.3% more advanced lithography process.

FX 1300, on the other hand, has 169.1% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 970 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 1300 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 970 is a desktop graphics card while Quadro FX 1300 is a workstation one.

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 970
GeForce GTX 970
NVIDIA Quadro FX 1300
Quadro FX 1300

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.


4.2 5448 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 970 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.6 5 votes

Rate Quadro FX 1300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 970 or Quadro FX 1300, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.