GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile vs Quadro 400

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro 400 with GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

Quadro 400
2011
512 MB DDR3, 32 Watt
0.39

RTX 3070 Mobile outperforms 400 by a whopping 9482% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1267127
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.01no data
Power efficiency0.8422.41
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGT216GA104
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date5 April 2011 (13 years ago)12 January 2021 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$169 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 cores485120
Core clock speed450 MHz1110 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1560 MHz
Number of transistors486 million17,400 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)32 Watt125 Watt
Texture fill rate7.200249.6
Floating-point processing power0.108 TFLOPS15.97 TFLOPS
ROPs880
TMUs16160
Tensor Coresno data160
Ray Tracing Coresno data40

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length163 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
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 typeDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount512 MB8 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed770 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth12.32 GB/s448.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno 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 DVI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.16.5
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.2
CUDA1.28.6

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.

Quadro 400 0.39
RTX 3070 Mobile 37.37
+9482%

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.

Quadro 400 148
RTX 3070 Mobile 14364
+9605%

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 HD1−2
−11400%
115
+11400%
1440p0−173
4K-0−145

Cost per frame, $

1080p169.00no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 122
+0%
122
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 119
+0%
119
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 99
+0%
99
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 97
+0%
97
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 224
+0%
224
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 140
+0%
140
+0%
Metro Exodus 112
+0%
112
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 85
+0%
85
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 80
+0%
80
+0%
Dota 2 127
+0%
127
+0%
Far Cry 5 79
+0%
79
+0%
Fortnite 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 183
+0%
183
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 118
+0%
118
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 125
+0%
125
+0%
Metro Exodus 91
+0%
91
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 66
+0%
66
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Valorant 98
+0%
98
+0%
World of Tanks 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 75
+0%
75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 68
+0%
68
+0%
Dota 2 120
+0%
120
+0%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 168
+0%
168
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 106
+0%
106
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Valorant 183
+0%
183
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 83
+0%
83
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 83
+0%
83
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 38
+0%
38
+0%
World of Tanks 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 47
+0%
47
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 43
+0%
43
+0%
Far Cry 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 125
+0%
125
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 78
+0%
78
+0%
Metro Exodus 91
+0%
91
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Valorant 118
+0%
118
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Dota 2 83
+0%
83
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 83
+0%
83
+0%
Metro Exodus 37
+0%
37
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24
+0%
24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 83
+0%
83
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 20
+0%
20
+0%
Dota 2 109
+0%
109
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 71
+0%
71
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 44
+0%
44
+0%
Valorant 64
+0%
64
+0%

This is how Quadro 400 and RTX 3070 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3070 Mobile is 11400% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.39 37.37
Recency 5 April 2011 12 January 2021
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 32 Watt 125 Watt

Quadro 400 has 290.6% lower power consumption.

RTX 3070 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 9482.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 400% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 400 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro 400 is a workstation card while GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile is a notebook 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 Quadro 400
Quadro 400
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile
GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile

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.


2.8 13 votes

Rate Quadro 400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 1962 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile 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.