GeForce GT 710 vs Quadro P600

Place in the ranking	496	952
Place by popularity	not in top-100	83
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	6.95	0.04
Power efficiency	14.93	5.98
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015)
GPU code name	GP107	GK208
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Release date	7 February 2017 (7 years ago)	27 March 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$178	$34.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro P600 has 17275% better value for money than GT 710.

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	384	192
Core clock speed	1430 MHz	954 MHz
Boost clock speed	1620 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	3,300 million	915 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	40 Watt	19 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	no data	95 °C
Texture fill rate	38.88	15.26
Floating-point processing power	1.244 TFLOPS	0.3663 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	8
TMUs	24	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).

Bus support	no data	PCI Express 2.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x8
Length	145 mm	145 mm
Height	no data	2.713" (6.9 cm)
Width	1-slot	1-slot
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	GDDR5	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	1252 MHz	1.8 GB/s
Memory bandwidth	80.13 GB/s	14.4 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	Portable Device Dependent	Dual Link DVI-DHDMIVGA
Multi monitor support	no data	3 displays
HDMI	-	+
HDCP	-	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
Audio input for HDMI	no data	Internal

Supported technologies

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

3D Vision	-	+
PureVideo	-	+
PhysX	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	6.7	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.5
OpenCL	3.0	1.2
Vulkan	1.3	1.1.126
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.

Quadro P600 8.57
+426%

GT 710 1.63

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.

Quadro P600 3308
+428%

GT 710 627

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Quadro P600 4083
+331%

GT 710 947

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Quadro P600 28957
+298%

GT 710 7270

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Quadro P600 10629
+446%

GT 710 1947

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Quadro P600 243785
+246%

GT 710 70459

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Quadro P600 9744
+401%

GT 710 1946

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Quadro P600 10634
+600%

GT 710 1519

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	33 +313%	8 −313%
1440p	21−24 +425%	4 −425%
4K	35−40 +400%	7 −400%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	5.39	4.37
1440p	8.48	8.75
4K	5.09	5.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

12−14
+225%

4−5

−225%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 +250%	6−7 −250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Battlefield 5	24−27 +550%	4−5 −550%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16−18 +240%	5−6 −240%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +225%	4−5 −225%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +850%	2−3 −850%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 +500%	4−5 −500%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +1040%	5−6 −1040%
Hitman 3	16−18 +167%	6−7 −167%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 +200%	16−18 −200%
Metro Exodus	24−27 +550%	4−5 −550%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +700%	3−4 −700%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 +211%	9−10 −211%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +70.6%	30−35 −70.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 +250%	6−7 −250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Battlefield 5	24−27 +550%	4−5 −550%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16−18 +240%	5−6 −240%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +225%	4−5 −225%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +850%	2−3 −850%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 +500%	4−5 −500%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +1040%	5−6 −1040%
Hitman 3	16−18 +167%	6−7 −167%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 +200%	16−18 −200%
Metro Exodus	24−27 +550%	4−5 −550%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +700%	3−4 −700%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 +460%	5 −460%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +100%	12−14 −100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +70.6%	30−35 −70.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 +250%	6−7 −250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16−18 +240%	5−6 −240%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +225%	4−5 −225%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +850%	2−3 −850%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +1040%	5−6 −1040%
Hitman 3	16−18 +167%	6−7 −167%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 +200%	16−18 −200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 +460%	5 −460%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14 +367%	3 −367%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +70.6%	30−35 −70.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

24−27
+700%

3−4

−700%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 +750%	2−3 −750%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 +550%	2−3 −550%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Far Cry 5	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +483%	6−7 −483%
Hitman 3	12−14 +71.4%	7−8 −71.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 +260%	5−6 −260%
Metro Exodus	10−12 +450%	2−3 −450%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 +80%	5 −80%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +575%	8−9 −575%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

14−16
+250%

4−5

−250%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Hitman 3	5−6	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +450%	6−7 −450%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −25%	5 +25%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9
+167%

3−4

−167%

This is how Quadro P600 and GT 710 compete in popular games:

Quadro P600 is 313% faster in 1080p
Quadro P600 is 425% faster in 1440p
Quadro P600 is 400% faster in 4K

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

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Quadro P600 is 1040% faster.
in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GT 710 is 25% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Quadro P600 is ahead in 52 tests (98%)
GT 710 is ahead in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	8.57	1.63
Recency	7 February 2017	27 March 2014
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	40 Watt	19 Watt

Quadro P600 has a 425.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

GT 710, on the other hand, has 110.5% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P600 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 710 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P600 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GT 710 is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.