Quadro FX 5500 vs Quadro FX 3700

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 3700 and Quadro FX 5500, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

FX 3700
2008
512 MB GDDR3, 78 Watt
0.98
+55.6%

FX 3700 outperforms FX 5500 by an impressive 56% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking11161200
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code nameG92G71
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date8 January 2008 (16 years ago)20 April 2006 (18 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,599 $2,999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

FX 3700 and FX 5500 have a nearly equal value for money.

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 cores112no data
Core clock speed500 MHz650 MHz
Number of transistors754 million278 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)78 Watt96 Watt
Texture fill rate28.0015.60
Floating-point performance0.28 gflopsno data

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 1.0 x16
Length267 mm229 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin1x 6-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 typeGDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount512 MB1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1600 MHz1010 MHz
Memory bandwidth51.2 GB/s32.32 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-Video2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model4.03.0
OpenGL3.32.1
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.1-

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 0.98
+55.6%
FX 5500 0.63

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.

FX 3700 377
+55.8%
FX 5500 242

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 0.98 0.63
Recency 8 January 2008 20 April 2006
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 1 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 78 Watt 96 Watt

FX 3700 has a 55.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 38.5% more advanced lithography process, and 23.1% lower power consumption.

FX 5500, on the other hand, has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The Quadro FX 3700 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 5500 in performance tests.


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 Quadro FX 5500
Quadro FX 5500

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.


4.2 20 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 3 votes

Rate Quadro FX 5500 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.