Quadro FX 770M vs Radeon R6 (Kaveri)

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R6 (Kaveri) with Quadro FX 770M, including specs and performance data.

R6 (Kaveri)
2014
1.73
+215%

R6 (Kaveri) outperforms FX 770M by a whopping 215% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking9391231
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.01
Power efficiencyno data1.11
ArchitectureGCN 1.1 (2014)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameKaveriG96
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date4 June 2014 (10 years ago)14 August 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$527

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores38432
Core clock speed533 MHz500 MHz
Boost clock speed654 MHzno data
Number of transistors2410 Million314 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data35 Watt
Texture fill rateno data8.000
Floating-point processing powerno data0.08 TFLOPS
ROPsno data8
TMUsno data16

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 sizemedium sizedmedium sized
Interfaceno dataMXM-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 typeno dataGDDR3
Maximum RAM amountno data512 MB
Memory bus width64/128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data800 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data25.6 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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (FL 12_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Modelno data4.0
OpenGLno data3.3
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA-1.1

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.

R6 (Kaveri) 1.73
+215%
FX 770M 0.55

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.

R6 (Kaveri) 691
+214%
FX 770M 220

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 HD10
+233%
3−4
−233%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data175.67

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Fortnite 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
Valorant 35−40
+32.1%
27−30
−32.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35−40
+112%
16−18
−112%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Dota 2 20−22
+81.8%
10−12
−81.8%
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Fortnite 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Metro Exodus 3−4 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Valorant 35−40
+32.1%
27−30
−32.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Dota 2 20−22
+81.8%
10−12
−81.8%
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Valorant 35−40
+32.1%
27−30
−32.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 1−2 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Valorant 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 3−4 0−1
Far Cry 5 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

This is how R6 (Kaveri) and FX 770M compete in popular games:

  • R6 (Kaveri) is 233% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the R6 (Kaveri) is 450% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R6 (Kaveri) is ahead in 33 tests (97%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.73 0.55
Recency 4 June 2014 14 August 2008
Chip lithography 28 nm 65 nm

R6 (Kaveri) has a 214.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 132.1% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R6 (Kaveri) is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 770M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R6 (Kaveri) is a notebook graphics card while Quadro FX 770M is a mobile workstation one.

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.


AMD Radeon R6 (Kaveri)
Radeon R6 (Kaveri)
NVIDIA Quadro FX 770M
Quadro FX 770M

Other comparisons

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.


4.1 16 votes

Rate Radeon R6 (Kaveri) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 31 vote

Rate Quadro FX 770M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R6 (Kaveri) or Quadro FX 770M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.