Quadro FX 3700M vs GeForce GTX 850M

Place in the ranking	570	1061
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.01
Power efficiency	10.08	1.10
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2017)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	GM107	G92
Market segment	Laptop	Mobile workstation
Release date	12 March 2014 (10 years ago)	14 August 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$925

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	640	128
Core clock speed	Up to 936 MHz	550 MHz
Number of transistors	1,870 million	754 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	45 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	36.08	35.20
Floating-point processing power	1.155 TFLOPS	0.352 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	40	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	large
Bus support	PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-HE
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 type	DDR3	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1 GB
Standard memory configuration	DDR3 or GDDR5	no data
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	Up to 2500 MHz	800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	80.0 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	No outputs
eDP 1.2 signal support	Up to 3840x2160	no data
LVDS signal support	Up to 1920x1200	no data
VGA аnalog display support	Up to 2048x1536	no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	Up to 3840x2160	no data
HDMI	+	-
HDCP content protection	+	-
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI	+	-
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming	+	-

Supported technologies

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

H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	+	-
Optimus	+	-
Ansel	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	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	+	+

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.

GTX 850M 6.51
+452%

FX 3700M 1.18

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 850M 2511
+451%

FX 3700M 456

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GTX 850M 15863
+214%

FX 3700M 5053

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	84 +500%	14−16 −500%
Full HD	32 +540%	5−6 −540%
4K	10 +900%	1−2 −900%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	185.00
4K	no data	925.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

10−11
+233%

3−4

−233%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 +240%	5−6 −240%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Battlefield 5	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +250%	4−5 −250%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +233%	3−4 −233%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +1300%	1−2 −1300%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +4200%	1−2 −4200%
Hitman 3	12−14 +117%	6−7 −117%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 +179%	14−16 −179%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 +800%	2−3 −800%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +175%	8−9 −175%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +62.5%	30−35 −62.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 +240%	5−6 −240%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Battlefield 5	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +250%	4−5 −250%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +233%	3−4 −233%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +1300%	1−2 −1300%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +4200%	1−2 −4200%
Hitman 3	12−14 +117%	6−7 −117%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 +179%	14−16 −179%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 +800%	2−3 −800%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +175%	8−9 −175%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	58 +427%	10−12 −427%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +62.5%	30−35 −62.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 +240%	5−6 −240%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +250%	4−5 −250%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +233%	3−4 −233%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +1300%	1−2 −1300%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +4200%	1−2 −4200%
Hitman 3	12−14 +117%	6−7 −117%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 +179%	14−16 −179%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +175%	8−9 −175%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	11 +0%	10−12 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +62.5%	30−35 −62.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

18−20
+800%

2−3

−800%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +600%	3−4 −600%
Hitman 3	10−11 +42.9%	7−8 −42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +250%	4−5 −250%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	3−4	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +720%	5−6 −720%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−12
+175%

4−5

−175%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5	0−1
Hitman 3	3−4	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Metro Exodus	4−5	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	3−4	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	1−2	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
+250%

2−3

−250%

This is how GTX 850M and FX 3700M compete in popular games:

GTX 850M is 500% faster in 900p
GTX 850M is 540% faster in 1080p
GTX 850M is 900% faster in 4K

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

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 850M is 4200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 850M is ahead in 46 tests (98%)
there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	6.51	1.18
Recency	12 March 2014	14 August 2008
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	45 Watt	75 Watt

GTX 850M has a 451.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 132.1% more advanced lithography process, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 850M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3700M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 850M is a notebook graphics card while Quadro FX 3700M 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.