Radeon HD 8670M vs Quadro FX 2700M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 2700M with Radeon HD 8670M, including specs and performance data.

FX 2700M
2008
1 GB GDDR3, 65 Watt
0.95

HD 8670M outperforms FX 2700M by a considerable 42% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11251026
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.02no data
ArchitectureG9x (2007−2010)GCN (2011−2017)
GPU code nameNB9E-GLM2Sun
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date14 August 2008 (16 years ago)16 November 2012 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$99.95 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 cores48384
Core clock speed530 MHz775 MHz
Boost clock speedno data825 MHz
Number of transistors505 million690 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Wattno data
Texture fill rate12.7219.50
Floating-point processing power0.1272 TFLOPS0.624 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs2420

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 sizelargemedium sized
InterfaceMXM-HEPCIe 3.0 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 typeGDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth51.14 GB/s16 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (11_1)
Shader Model4.05.1
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA1.1-

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. 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.

FX 2700M 0.95
HD 8670M 1.35
+42.1%

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
HD 8670M 520
+42.1%

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
HD 8670M 4077
+45.7%

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 HD9−10
−44.4%
13
+44.4%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 0−1 2−3
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Hitman 3 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−6.5%
30−35
+6.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 0−1 2−3
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Hitman 3 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−6.5%
30−35
+6.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 0−1 2−3
Hitman 3 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−6.5%
30−35
+6.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 1−2
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 1−2

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 1−2
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1

This is how FX 2700M and HD 8670M compete in popular games:

  • HD 8670M is 44% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the HD 8670M is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD 8670M is ahead in 34 tests (79%)
  • there's a draw in 9 tests (21%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.95 1.35
Recency 14 August 2008 16 November 2012
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 28 nm

HD 8670M has a 42.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 132.1% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon HD 8670M 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 Radeon HD 8670M 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.

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
AMD Radeon HD 8670M
Radeon HD 8670M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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
3.4 228 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8670M 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.