GeForce 9700M GT vs Quadro P3000 Mobile

Place in the ranking	328	1231
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	15.49	0.82
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	GP104	G96
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	11 January 2017 (8 years ago)	29 July 2008 (16 years ago)

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	1280	32
Core clock speed	1088 MHz	625 MHz
Boost clock speed	1215 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	7,200 million	314 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	45 Watt
Texture fill rate	97.20	10.00
Floating-point processing power	3.11 TFLOPS	0.0992 TFLOPS
Gigaflops	no data	148
ROPs	48	8
TMUs	80	16

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).

Laptop size	large	medium sized
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	MXM-II

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	GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	512 MB
Memory bus width	192 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1753 MHz	800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	168 GB/s	25.6 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

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	No outputs	No outputs
Display Port	1.4	no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus	+	-
3D Stereo	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
nView Display Management	+	no data
Optimus	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	6.4	4.0
OpenGL	4.5	3.3
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	N/A
CUDA	6.1	+

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. 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.

P3000 Mobile 16.10
+2996%

9700M GT 0.52

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.

P3000 Mobile 6486
+3018%

9700M GT 208

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

P3000 Mobile 33390
+1809%

9700M GT 1750

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	65 +3150%	2−3 −3150%
4K	31 +3000%	1−2 −3000%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	27−30 +383%	6−7 −383%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +1000%	3−4 −1000%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 +5300%	1−2 −5300%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 +383%	6−7 −383%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +1000%	3−4 −1000%
Forza Horizon 4	70−75 +1067%	6−7 −1067%
Forza Horizon 5	45−50 +4400%	1−2 −4400%
Metro Exodus	45−50 +4500%	1−2 −4500%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40−45 +700%	5−6 −700%
Valorant	65−70 +3300%	2−3 −3300%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 +5300%	1−2 −5300%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 +383%	6−7 −383%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +1000%	3−4 −1000%
Dota 2	60−65 +5900%	1−2 −5900%
Far Cry 5	55−60 +638%	8−9 −638%
Fortnite	90−95	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	70−75 +1067%	6−7 −1067%
Forza Horizon 5	45−50 +4400%	1−2 −4400%
Grand Theft Auto V	60−65 +5900%	1−2 −5900%
Metro Exodus	45−50 +4500%	1−2 −4500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 +1375%	8−9 −1375%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40−45 +700%	5−6 −700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50−55 +940%	5−6 −940%
Valorant	65−70 +3300%	2−3 −3300%
World of Tanks	200−210 +1206%	16−18 −1206%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 +5300%	1−2 −5300%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 +383%	6−7 −383%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +1000%	3−4 −1000%
Dota 2	60−65 +5900%	1−2 −5900%
Far Cry 5	55−60 +638%	8−9 −638%
Forza Horizon 4	70−75 +1067%	6−7 −1067%
Forza Horizon 5	45−50 +4400%	1−2 −4400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 +1375%	8−9 −1375%
Valorant	65−70 +3300%	2−3 −3300%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	24−27	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	24−27	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 +3733%	3−4 −3733%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16	0−1
World of Tanks	110−120 +11600%	1−2 −11600%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 +3300%	1−2 −3300%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +333%	3−4 −333%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +975%	4−5 −975%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +4100%	1−2 −4100%
Forza Horizon 5	24−27	0−1
Metro Exodus	35−40 +3700%	1−2 −3700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +475%	4−5 −475%
Valorant	40−45 +760%	5−6 −760%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Dota 2	27−30 +93.3%	14−16 −93.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	27−30 +93.3%	14−16 −93.3%
Metro Exodus	12−14	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	50−55 +4900%	1−2 −4900%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 +93.3%	14−16 −93.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Dota 2	27−30 +93.3%	14−16 −93.3%
Far Cry 5	21−24	0−1
Fortnite	20−22	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	24−27	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	12−14	0−1
Valorant	18−20 +1800%	1−2 −1800%

This is how P3000 Mobile and 9700M GT compete in popular games:

P3000 Mobile is 3150% faster in 1080p
P3000 Mobile is 3000% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in World of Tanks, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the P3000 Mobile is 11600% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

P3000 Mobile is ahead in 32 tests (94%)
there's a draw in 2 tests (6%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	16.10	0.52
Recency	11 January 2017	29 July 2008
Maximum RAM amount	6 GB	512 MB
Chip lithography	16 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	45 Watt

P3000 Mobile has a 2996.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 306.3% more advanced lithography process.

9700M GT, on the other hand, has 66.7% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P3000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9700M GT in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P3000 Mobile is a mobile workstation card while GeForce 9700M GT 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.