Quadro FX 1700M vs GeForce GTX 680

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking355not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.95no data
Power efficiency5.12no data
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameGK104G96
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date22 March 2012 (12 years ago)1 October 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 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 cores153632
Core clock speed1006 MHz625 MHz
Boost clock speed1058 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,540 million314 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)195 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate135.410.00
Floating-point processing power3.25 TFLOPS0.0992 TFLOPS
ROPs328
TMUs12816

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
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-II
Length254 mmno data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinno data
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount2048 MB512 MB
Memory bus width256-bit GDDR5128 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.2 GB/s25.6 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 ConnectorsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPortNo outputs
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.23.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA+1.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



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.

GTX 680 5565
+3135%
FX 1700M 172

Pros & cons summary


Recency 22 March 2012 1 October 2008
Maximum RAM amount 2048 MB 512 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 195 Watt 50 Watt

GTX 680 has an age advantage of 3 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 132.1% more advanced lithography process.

FX 1700M, on the other hand, has 290% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 680 and Quadro FX 1700M. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 680 is a desktop 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.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680
GeForce GTX 680
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.


3.8 573 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 680 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.