GeForce Go 7950 GTX vs Quadro FX 570

Place in performance ranking	1165	1138
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	G7x (2005−2007)
GPU code name	G84	G71M
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	12 September 2007 (16 years ago)	12 October 2006 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$199	no data
Current price	$173 (0.9x MSRP)	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores	16	32
Core clock speed	460 MHz	8 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	575 MHz
Number of transistors	289 million	278 million
Manufacturing process technology	80 nm	90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	38 Watt	45 Watt
Texture fill rate	3.680	13.80
Floating-point performance	29.44 gflops	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Quadro FX 570 and GeForce Go 7950 GTX 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	large
Interface	PCIe 1.0 x16	MXM-III
Length	198 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	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	DDR2	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	512 MB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	800 MHz	1400 MHz
Memory bandwidth	12.8 GB/s	44.8 GB/s
Shared memory	no 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 Connectors

2x DVI

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model	4.0	3.0
OpenGL	3.3	2.1
OpenCL	1.1	N/A
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	1.1	no data

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 570 0.60

Go 7950 GTX 0.68
+13.3%

GeForce Go 7950 GTX outperforms Quadro FX 570 by 13% based on our aggregate 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 570 232

Go 7950 GTX 263
+13.4%

GeForce Go 7950 GTX outperforms Quadro FX 570 by 13% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

2−3

−50%

3−4
+50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Far Cry New Dawn	0−1	1−2
Hitman 3	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −20%	12−14 +20%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	8−9 −25%	10−11 +25%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Far Cry New Dawn	0−1	1−2
Hitman 3	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −20%	12−14 +20%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Watch Dogs: Legion	8−9 −25%	10−11 +25%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −20%	12−14 +20%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Watch Dogs: Legion	8−9 −25%	10−11 +25%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	1−2
Far Cry 5	0−1	1−2
Hitman 3	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−50%

3−4
+50%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn	0−1	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	0−1	1−2

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	1−2
Horizon Zero Dawn	0−1	1−2
Metro Exodus	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

1−2

−100%

2−3
+100%

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.60	0.68
Recency	12 September 2007	12 October 2006
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	512 MB
Chip lithography	80 nm	90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	38 Watt	45 Watt