Quadro FX 2700M vs GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile with Quadro FX 2700M, including specs and performance data.

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile
2021
4 GB GDDR6, 60 Watt
24.88
+2519%

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile outperforms FX 2700M by a whopping 2519% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking2131129
Place by popularity74not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.02
Power efficiency30.031.06
ArchitectureAmpere (2020−2024)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameGN20-P0G94
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date11 May 2021 (3 years ago)14 August 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$99.95

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 cores204848
Core clock speed1238 MHz530 MHz
Boost clock speed1500 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data505 million
Manufacturing process technology8 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)60 Watt (35 - 80 Watt TGP)65 Watt
Texture fill rateno data12.72
Floating-point processing powerno data0.1272 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data24

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 sizelargelarge
Interfaceno dataMXM-HE

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 typeGDDR6GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB512 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed12000 MHz799 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data51.14 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_211.1 (10_0)
Shader Modelno data4.0
OpenGLno data3.3
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-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.

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile 24.88
+2519%
FX 2700M 0.95

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.

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile 43216
+1444%
FX 2700M 2799

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 HD62
+3000%
2−3
−3000%
1440p43
+4200%
1−2
−4200%
4K260−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 66
+2100%
3−4
−2100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55−60
+1000%
5−6
−1000%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 58
+2800%
2−3
−2800%
Battlefield 5 80−85
+2633%
3−4
−2633%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+1600%
3−4
−1600%
Cyberpunk 2077 52
+1633%
3−4
−1633%
Far Cry 5 55−60 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+3150%
2−3
−3150%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+2800%
5−6
−2800%
Hitman 3 57
+1040%
5−6
−1040%
Horizon Zero Dawn 110−120
+785%
12−14
−785%
Metro Exodus 126
+3050%
4−5
−3050%
Red Dead Redemption 2 87
+8600%
1−2
−8600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 80−85
+1100%
7−8
−1100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 186
+500%
30−35
−500%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55−60
+1000%
5−6
−1000%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 32
+3100%
1−2
−3100%
Battlefield 5 80−85
+2633%
3−4
−2633%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+1600%
3−4
−1600%
Cyberpunk 2077 41
+1267%
3−4
−1267%
Far Cry 5 55−60 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+3150%
2−3
−3150%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+2800%
5−6
−2800%
Hitman 3 55
+1000%
5−6
−1000%
Horizon Zero Dawn 110−120
+785%
12−14
−785%
Metro Exodus 95
+3067%
3−4
−3067%
Red Dead Redemption 2 63
+6200%
1−2
−6200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 94
+1243%
7−8
−1243%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+440%
10−11
−440%
Watch Dogs: Legion 180
+481%
30−35
−481%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55−60
+1000%
5−6
−1000%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+1600%
3−4
−1600%
Cyberpunk 2077 34
+1033%
3−4
−1033%
Far Cry 5 55−60 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+2800%
5−6
−2800%
Hitman 3 51
+920%
5−6
−920%
Horizon Zero Dawn 74
+469%
12−14
−469%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 81
+1057%
7−8
−1057%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
+360%
10−11
−360%
Watch Dogs: Legion 26
−19.2%
30−35
+19.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 72
+7100%
1−2
−7100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+4600%
1−2
−4600%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+3700%
1−2
−3700%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+2500%
1−2
−2500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 22 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+2700%
1−2
−2700%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+2800%
1−2
−2800%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+2760%
5−6
−2760%
Hitman 3 37
+429%
7−8
−429%
Horizon Zero Dawn 59
+1375%
4−5
−1375%
Metro Exodus 52
+5100%
1−2
−5100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 56
+2700%
2−3
−2700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 166
+4050%
4−5
−4050%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 53
+1667%
3−4
−1667%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20 0−1
Hitman 3 15 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+3100%
4−5
−3100%
Metro Exodus 37
+3600%
1−2
−3600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
+2800%
1−2
−2800%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 6 0−1
Far Cry 5 14−16 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+3300%
1−2
−3300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 34
+3300%
1−2
−3300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 25
+1150%
2−3
−1150%

This is how RTX 3050 4GB Mobile and FX 2700M compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is 3000% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is 4200% faster in 1440p

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

  • in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is 8600% faster.
  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the FX 2700M is 19% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is ahead in 39 tests (98%)
  • FX 2700M is ahead in 1 test (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 24.88 0.95
Recency 11 May 2021 14 August 2008
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 8 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 60 Watt 65 Watt

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile has a 2518.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 712.5% more advanced lithography process, and 8.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 2700M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is a notebook graphics card while Quadro FX 2700M 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 RTX 3050 4GB Mobile
GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile
NVIDIA Quadro FX 2700M
Quadro FX 2700M

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 1198 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 9 votes

Rate Quadro FX 2700M 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.