Quadro FX 4700 X2 vs GeForce GT 645M

Place in the ranking	838	923
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.01
Power efficiency	5.23	0.54
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	GK107	G92
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	1 October 2012 (12 years ago)	18 April 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$2,999

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 cores	384	128
Core clock speed	Up to 710 MHz	600 MHz
Number of transistors	1,270 million	754 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	32 Watt	226 Watt
Texture fill rate	22.69	38.40
Floating-point processing power	0.5445 TFLOPS	0.384 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	32	64

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 size	medium sized	no data
Bus support	PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

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	DDR3\GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	128bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	Up to 64.0 GB/s	51.2 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	No outputs	2x DVI, 1x S-Video
HDMI	+	-
HDCP	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	Up to 2048x1536	no data

Supported technologies

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

3D Blu-Ray	+	-
Optimus	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 API	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	5.1	4.0
OpenGL	4.5	3.3
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	1.1.126	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. 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.

GT 645M 2.42
+38.3%

FX 4700 X2 1.75

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.

GT 645M 934
+38.2%

FX 4700 X2 676

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:

900p	30 +42.9%	21−24 −42.9%
Full HD	23 +43.8%	16−18 −43.8%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

187.44

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

5−6
+66.7%

3−4

−66.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 +60%	5−6 −60%
Battlefield 5	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +57.1%	7−8 −57.1%
Hitman 3	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 +42.9%	14−16 −42.9%
Metro Exodus	1−2	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 +57.1%	7−8 −57.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +54.2%	24−27 −54.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 +60%	5−6 −60%
Battlefield 5	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +57.1%	7−8 −57.1%
Hitman 3	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 +42.9%	14−16 −42.9%
Metro Exodus	1−2	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 +57.1%	7−8 −57.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +44.4%	9−10 −44.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +54.2%	24−27 −54.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 +60%	5−6 −60%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +57.1%	7−8 −57.1%
Hitman 3	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 +42.9%	14−16 −42.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 +57.1%	7−8 −57.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +44.4%	9−10 −44.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +54.2%	24−27 −54.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6
+66.7%

3−4

−66.7%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Hitman 3	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Horizon Zero Dawn	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14−16 +40%	10−11 −40%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6
+66.7%

3−4

−66.7%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	0−1	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	1−2	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4
+50%

2−3

−50%

This is how GT 645M and FX 4700 X2 compete in popular games:

GT 645M is 43% faster in 900p
GT 645M is 44% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.42	1.75
Recency	1 October 2012	18 April 2008
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	32 Watt	226 Watt

GT 645M has a 38.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 132.1% more advanced lithography process, and 606.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GT 645M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 4700 X2 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 645M is a notebook card while Quadro FX 4700 X2 is a workstation one.

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