NVS 4200M vs Quadro FX 3700

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

FX 3700
2008
512 MB GDDR3
0.97
+36.6%

Quadro FX 3700 outperforms NVS 4200M by 37% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary Details

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

Place in performance ranking10731126
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation0.020.01
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameG92GF119
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date8 January 2008 (16 years ago)22 February 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,599 no data
Current price$256 (0.2x MSRP)$229

Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

FX 3700 has 100% better value for money than NVS 4200M.

Detailed Specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores11248
Core clock speed500 MHz810 MHz
Number of transistors754 million292 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)78 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rate28.006.480
Floating-point performance280 gflops155.52 gflops

Form Factor & Compatibility

Information on Quadro FX 3700 and NVS 4200M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16MXM
Length267 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno data

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 amount512 MB1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1600 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth51.2 GB/s12.8 GB/s
Shared memoryno 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API Compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model4.05.1
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.12.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 0.97
+36.6%
NVS 4200M 0.71

Quadro FX 3700 outperforms NVS 4200M by 37% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

FX 3700 377
+37.1%
NVS 4200M 275

Quadro FX 3700 outperforms NVS 4200M by 37% in Passmark.

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 HD16−18
+23.1%
13
−23.1%

Pros & Cons Summary


Performance score 0.97 0.71
Recency 8 January 2008 22 February 2011
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 1 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 78 Watt 25 Watt

The Quadro FX 3700 is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 4200M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 3700 is a workstation card while NVS 4200M 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 3700
Quadro FX 3700
NVIDIA NVS 4200M
NVS 4200M

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 rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.3 19 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 122 votes

Rate NVS 4200M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & Сomments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.