GeForce RTX 5090 vs Quadro FX 3700

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 3700 with GeForce RTX 5090, including specs and performance data.

FX 3700
2008
512 MB GDDR3, 78 Watt
0.94

RTX 5090 outperforms FX 3700 by a whopping 10538% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11261
Place by popularitynot in top-10059
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.0111.13
Power efficiency0.8612.38
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Blackwell 2.0 (2025)
GPU code nameG92GB202
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date8 January 2008 (17 years ago)30 January 2025 (recently)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,599 $1,999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

RTX 5090 has 111200% better value for money than FX 3700.

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 cores11221760
Core clock speed500 MHz2017 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2407 MHz
Number of transistors754 million92,200 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)78 Watt575 Watt
Texture fill rate28.001,637
Floating-point processing power0.28 TFLOPS104.8 TFLOPS
ROPs16176
TMUs56680
Tensor Coresno data680
Ray Tracing Coresno data170

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 5.0 x16
Length267 mm304 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin1x 16-pin

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 typeGDDR3GDDR7
Maximum RAM amount512 MB32 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit512 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth51.2 GB/s1.79 TB/s

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-Video1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b
HDMI-+

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/A1.4
CUDA1.110.1
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. 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 3700 0.94
RTX 5090 100.00
+10538%

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 3700 372
RTX 5090 39748
+10585%

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
−20600%
207
+20600%
1440p1−2
−18300%
184
+18300%
4K1−2
−14000%
141
+14000%

Cost per frame, $

1080p1599.00
−16458%
9.66
+16458%
1440p1599.00
−14618%
10.86
+14618%
4K1599.00
−11179%
14.18
+11179%
  • RTX 5090 has 16458% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RTX 5090 has 14618% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RTX 5090 has 11179% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Metro Exodus 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Valorant 800−850
+0%
800−850
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Dota 2 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Far Cry 5 159
+0%
159
+0%
Fortnite 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Metro Exodus 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 800−850
+0%
800−850
+0%
World of Tanks 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 202
+0%
202
+0%
Far Cry 5 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Valorant 800−850
+0%
800−850
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 183
+0%
183
+0%
Dota 2 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
World of Tanks 500−550
+0%
500−550
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%
Metro Exodus 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Valorant 550−600
+0%
550−600
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 174
+0%
174
+0%
Dota 2 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Metro Exodus 167
+0%
167
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 55
+0%
55
+0%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Valorant 350−400
+0%
350−400
+0%

This is how FX 3700 and RTX 5090 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 5090 is 20600% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 5090 is 18300% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 5090 is 14000% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 45 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.94 100.00
Recency 8 January 2008 30 January 2025
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 32 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 78 Watt 575 Watt

FX 3700 has 637.2% lower power consumption.

RTX 5090, on the other hand, has a 10538.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 17 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1200% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 5090 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3700 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 3700 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce RTX 5090 is a desktop 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 3700
Quadro FX 3700
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090
GeForce RTX 5090

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.


4.1 21 vote

Rate Quadro FX 3700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 1755 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 5090 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.