FX 3700M vs 500M

#ad
Buy
VS

Combined performance score

Quadro 500M
1.47
+24.6%

500M outperforms FX 3700M by 25% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking9361022
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money0.060.05
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)G9x (2007−2010)
GPU code nameGF108NB9E-GLM3
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date22 February 2011 (13 years old)14 August 2008 (15 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$925
Current price$58 $163 (0.2x MSRP)
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro 500M has 20% better value for money than FX 3700M.

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 cores96128
Core clock speed700 MHz550 MHz
Number of transistors585 million754 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate11.2035.20
Floating-point performance268.8 gflops352.0 gflops

Size and compatibility

Information on Quadro 500M and Quadro FX 3700M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). 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 sizeno datalarge
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)MXM-HE
WidthMXM Moduleno 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 typeDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB1 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1800 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth28.8 GB/s51.2 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA2.1+

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.

Quadro 500M 1.47
+24.6%
FX 3700M 1.18

500M outperforms FX 3700M by 25% 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%

Quadro 500M 570
+25%
FX 3700M 456

500M outperforms FX 3700M by 25% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

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

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 1.47 1.18
Recency 22 February 2011 14 August 2008
Chip lithography 40 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 75 Watt

The Quadro 500M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3700M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro 500M is a workstation card while Quadro FX 3700M 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 Quadro 500M
Quadro 500M
NVIDIA Quadro FX 3700M
Quadro FX 3700M

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.


This video card has no user ratings yet.

Rate NVIDIA Quadro 500M on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate NVIDIA Quadro FX 3700M 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.