Quadro T500 Mobile vs GeForce FX 5700 Ultra

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce FX 5700 Ultra with Quadro T500 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

FX 5700 Ultra
2003
128 MB GDDR2, 46 Watt
0.09

T500 Mobile outperforms FX 5700 Ultra by a whopping 10022% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1462478
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.1435.33
ArchitectureRankine (2003−2005)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameNV36TU117
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date23 October 2003 (21 year ago)2 December 2020 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 coresno data896
Core clock speed475 MHz1365 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1695 MHz
Number of transistors82 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)46 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate1.90094.92
Floating-point processing powerno data3.037 TFLOPS
ROPs432
TMUs456

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 datamedium sized
InterfaceAGP 8xPCIe 3.0 x16
Length229 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x Molexno data

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 typeGDDR2GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount128 MB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed453 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.5 GB/s80 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.0a12 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.6
OpenGL1.5 (2.1)4.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.2
CUDA-7.5

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-0−136
1440p-0−115
4K-0−117

Cost per frame, $

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 30
+0%
30
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Hitman 3 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 28
+0%
28
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Hitman 3 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+0%
28
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 27
+0%
27
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+0%
19
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Hitman 3 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Battlefield 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 68 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.09 9.11
Recency 23 October 2003 2 December 2020
Maximum RAM amount 128 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 130 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 46 Watt 18 Watt

T500 Mobile has a 10022.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 17 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 983.3% more advanced lithography process, and 155.6% lower power consumption.

The Quadro T500 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce FX 5700 Ultra in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce FX 5700 Ultra is a desktop card while Quadro T500 Mobile 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.


NVIDIA GeForce FX 5700 Ultra
GeForce FX 5700 Ultra
NVIDIA Quadro T500 Mobile
Quadro T500 Mobile

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.


2.6 5 votes

Rate GeForce FX 5700 Ultra on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 104 votes

Rate Quadro T500 Mobile 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.