Quadro FX 1700M vs Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000)

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking583not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency27.99no data
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameVega RenoirG96
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date7 January 2020 (4 years ago)1 October 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 cores38432
Core clock speed400 MHz625 MHz
Boost clock speed1500 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data314 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rateno data10.00
Floating-point processing powerno data0.0992 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 sizeno datalarge
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 widthno data128 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 compatibility

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

DirectX12_111.1 (10_0)
Shader Modelno data4.0
OpenGLno data3.3
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA-1.1

Pros & cons summary


Recency 7 January 2020 1 October 2008
Chip lithography 7 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 50 Watt

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) has an age advantage of 11 years, a 828.6% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) and Quadro FX 1700M. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is a notebook graphics card while Quadro FX 1700M 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.

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 RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
NVIDIA Quadro FX 1700M
Quadro FX 1700M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4 678 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Quadro FX 1700M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.