GeForce GT 710 vs Radeon PRO W7500
Aggregate performance score
Radeon PRO W7500 outperforms GeForce GT 710 by a whopping 2231% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 113 | 908 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 48 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 86.53 | 0.04 |
| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 (2022) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
| GPU code name | Navi 33 | GK208B |
| Market segment | Workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 3 August 2023 (less than a year ago) | 27 March 2014 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $429 | $34.99 |
| Current price | $409 (1x MSRP) | $81 (2.3x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
PRO W7500 has 216225% better value for money than GT 710.
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 | 1792 | 192 |
| CUDA cores | no data | 192 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 954 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1700 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 13,300 million | 915 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 6 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 70 Watt | 19 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | no data | 95 °C |
| Texture fill rate | 190.4 | 15.26 |
| Floating-point performance | no data | 366.3 gflops |
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 4.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x8 |
| Length | 216 mm | 5.7" (14.5 cm) |
| Height | no data | 2.713" (6.9 cm) |
| Width | 1-slot | 2-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 | GDDR6 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 10.8 GB/s | 1.8 GB/s |
| Memory bandwidth | 172.0 GB/s | 14.4 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 | 4x DisplayPort 2.1 | Dual Link DVI-DHDMIVGA |
| Multi monitor support | no data | 3 displays |
| HDMI | no data | + |
| HDCP | no data | + |
| 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 | no data | + |
| PureVideo | no data | + |
| PhysX | no data | + |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.7 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | 2.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | 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.
Radeon PRO W7500 outperforms GeForce GT 710 by 2231% 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%
Radeon PRO W7500 outperforms GeForce GT 710 by 2230% 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 | 180−190
+2150%
| 8
−2150%
|
| 1440p | 65−70
+2067%
| 3
−2067%
|
| 4K | 130−140
+2067%
| 6
−2067%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 37.99 | 1.63 |
| Recency | 3 August 2023 | 27 March 2014 |
| Cost | $429 | $34.99 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 2 GB |
| Chip lithography | 6 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 70 Watt | 19 Watt |
The Radeon PRO W7500 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 710 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon PRO W7500 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.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
