GeForce 8600 GS vs Quadro FX 2700M

#ad 
Buy
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 2700M with GeForce 8600 GS, including specs and performance data.

FX 2700M
2008
512 MB GDDR3, 65 Watt
0.82
+310%

FX 2700M outperforms 8600 GS by a whopping 310% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11321382
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.02no data
Power efficiency1.000.34
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameG94G84
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date14 August 2008 (16 years ago)17 April 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$99.95 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores4816
Core clock speed530 MHz540 MHz
Number of transistors505 million289 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt47 Watt
Texture fill rate12.724.320
Floating-point processing power0.1272 TFLOPS0.03808 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs248

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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-HEPCIe 1.0 x16
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeGDDR3DDR2
Maximum RAM amount512 MB512 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed799 MHz400 MHz
Memory bandwidth51.14 GB/s12.8 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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model4.04.0
OpenGL3.33.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.11.1

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.

FX 2700M 0.82
+310%
8600 GS 0.20

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.

FX 2700M 366
+302%
8600 GS 91

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Fortnite 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Valorant 30−35
+343%
7−8
−343%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21−24
+360%
5−6
−360%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Dota 2 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Fortnite 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Valorant 30−35
+343%
7−8
−343%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Dota 2 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Valorant 30−35
+343%
7−8
−343%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 0−1 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 4−5 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 1−2 0−1

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%
Valorant 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.82 0.20
Recency 14 August 2008 17 April 2007
Chip lithography 65 nm 80 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 47 Watt

FX 2700M has a 310% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 23.1% more advanced lithography process.

8600 GS, on the other hand, has 38.3% lower power consumption.

The Quadro FX 2700M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8600 GS in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 2700M is a mobile workstation card while GeForce 8600 GS is a desktop 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 Quadro FX 2700M
Quadro FX 2700M
NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GS
GeForce 8600 GS

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.


3.1 9 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 32 votes

Rate GeForce 8600 GS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 2700M or GeForce 8600 GS, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.