Quadro 1000M vs FX 3700
Aggregated performance score
1000M outperforms FX 3700 by 52% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 1072 | 938 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Value for money | 0.02 | 0.12 |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | Fermi (2010−2014) |
| GPU code name | G92 | Fermi |
| Market segment | Workstation | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 8 January 2008 (16 years ago) | 22 February 2011 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $1,599 | $174.95 |
| Current price | $256 (0.2x MSRP) | $129 (0.7x MSRP) |
Value for money
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
Quadro 1000M has 500% better value for money than FX 3700.
Technical specs
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 cores | 112 | 96 |
| Core clock speed | 500 MHz | 700 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 754 million | 585 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 78 Watt | 45 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 28.00 | 11.20 |
| Floating-point performance | 280 gflops | 268.8 gflops |
Size and compatibility
Information on Quadro FX 3700 and Quadro 1000M 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 size | no data | medium sized |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | MXM-A (3.0) |
| Length | 267 mm | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | no data |
Memory
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 | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 28.8 GB/s |
| Shared memory | no data | - |
Video outputs and ports
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 | No outputs |
API support
List of supported graphics 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 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.
1000M outperforms FX 3700 by 52% 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%
1000M outperforms FX 3700 by 51% 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 HD | 27−30
−51.9%
| 41
+51.9%
|
Advantages and disadvantages
| Performance score | 0.97 | 1.47 |
| Recency | 8 January 2008 | 22 February 2011 |
| Cost | $1599 | $174.95 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 2 GB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 78 Watt | 45 Watt |
The Quadro 1000M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3700 in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro FX 3700 is a workstation card while Quadro 1000M 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.
Similar GPU comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
