NVS 315 vs Quadro FX 3700

Place in the ranking	1152	1162
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.01	0.07
Power efficiency	0.84	3.24
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code name	G92	GF119
Market segment	Workstation	Workstation
Release date	8 January 2008 (17 years ago)	10 March 2013 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$1,599	$159

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

NVS 315 has 600% better value for money than FX 3700.

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores	112	48
Core clock speed	500 MHz	523 MHz
Number of transistors	754 million	292 million
Manufacturing process technology	65 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	78 Watt	19 Watt
Texture fill rate	28.00	4.184
Floating-point processing power	0.28 TFLOPS	0.1004 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	4
TMUs	56	8

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).

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	267 mm	145 mm
Width	1-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	None

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 type	GDDR3	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	1 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	800 MHz	875 MHz
Memory bandwidth	51.2 GB/s	14 GB/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 Connectors

2x DVI, 1x S-Video

1x DMS-59

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	4.0	5.1
OpenGL	3.3	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	1.1	2.1

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 3700 0.93
+6.9%

NVS 315 0.87

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
+7.5%

NVS 315 346

Gaming performance

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

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.93	0.87
Recency	8 January 2008	10 March 2013
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	1 GB
Chip lithography	65 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	78 Watt	19 Watt

FX 3700 has a 6.9% higher aggregate performance score.

NVS 315, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 62.5% more advanced lithography process, and 310.5% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro FX 3700 and NVS 315.