GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile vs Quadro FX 2700M

#ad 
Buy
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 2700M with GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

FX 2700M
2008
512 MB GDDR3, 65 Watt
0.82

RTX 4060 Mobile outperforms FX 2700M by a whopping 4700% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking113880
Place by popularitynot in top-10051
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.02no data
Power efficiency1.0027.17
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameG94AD107
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date14 August 2008 (16 years ago)3 January 2023 (2 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 cores483072
Core clock speed530 MHz1545 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1890 MHz
Number of transistors505 million18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt115 Watt
Texture fill rate12.72181.4
Floating-point processing power0.1272 TFLOPS11.61 TFLOPS
ROPs1648
TMUs2496
Tensor Coresno data96
Ray Tracing Coresno data24

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 sizelargelarge
InterfaceMXM-HEPCIe 4.0 x8

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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount512 MB8 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed799 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth51.14 GB/s256.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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 outputsPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.8
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA1.18.9
DLSS-+

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
RTX 4060 Mobile 39.36
+4700%

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
RTX 4060 Mobile 17587
+4705%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

FX 2700M 2799
RTX 4060 Mobile 90275
+3125%

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 HD2−3
−5500%
112
+5500%
1440p1−2
−6200%
63
+6200%
4K0−139

Cost per frame, $

1080p49.98no data
1440p99.95no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−6050%
123
+6050%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2
−11500%
116
+11500%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−4850%
99
+4850%
Fortnite 0−1 180−190
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−3160%
160−170
+3160%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2
−9300%
94
+9300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−1938%
160−170
+1938%
Valorant 30−35
−674%
240−250
+674%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21−24
−1109%
270−280
+1109%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−4100%
84
+4100%
Dota 2 14−16
−1071%
164
+1071%
Fortnite 0−1 180−190
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−3160%
160−170
+3160%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2
−7500%
76
+7500%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−2400%
25
+2400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−1938%
160−170
+1938%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−3720%
191
+3720%
Valorant 30−35
−674%
240−250
+674%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−3750%
77
+3750%
Dota 2 14−16
−1014%
156
+1014%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−3160%
160−170
+3160%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2
−6400%
65
+6400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−1938%
160−170
+1938%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−1920%
101
+1920%
Valorant 30−35
−674%
240−250
+674%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 0−1 180−190

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 5−6
−5760%
290−300
+5760%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−1844%
170−180
+1844%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 49
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−6100%
120−130
+6100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−7500%
76
+7500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 1−2
−11300%
110−120
+11300%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−407%
76
+407%
Valorant 5−6
−5020%
250−260
+5020%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 19
Far Cry 5 1−2
−3900%
40
+3900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−2950%
60−65
+2950%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
−2750%
55−60
+2750%

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 195
+0%
195
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 195
+0%
195
+0%
Far Cry 5 128
+0%
128
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 137
+0%
137
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 146
+0%
146
+0%
Far Cry 5 129
+0%
129
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 125
+0%
125
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 141
+0%
141
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Far Cry 5 125
+0%
125
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 98
+0%
98
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 85
+0%
85
+0%
Metro Exodus 59
+0%
59
+0%
Valorant 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Far Cry 5 98
+0%
98
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 44
+0%
44
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 39
+0%
39
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Metro Exodus 37
+0%
37
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55
+0%
55
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Dota 2 126
+0%
126
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

This is how FX 2700M and RTX 4060 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 4060 Mobile is 5500% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 4060 Mobile is 6200% faster in 1440p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Hogwarts Legacy, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the RTX 4060 Mobile is 11500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RTX 4060 Mobile is ahead in 33 tests (54%)
  • there's a draw in 28 tests (46%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.82 39.36
Recency 14 August 2008 3 January 2023
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 115 Watt

FX 2700M has 76.9% lower power consumption.

RTX 4060 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 4700% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1200% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 2700M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 2700M is a mobile workstation card while GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile is a mobile 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 Quadro FX 2700M
Quadro FX 2700M
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile
GeForce RTX 4060

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
4.3 3689 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 2700M or GeForce RTX 4060 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.