Quadro FX 1700 vs NVS 310

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared NVS 310 and Quadro FX 1700, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

NVS 310
2012
512 MB DDR3, 20 Watt
0.65
+38.3%

NVS 310 outperforms FX 1700 by a substantial 38% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11901237
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.03no data
Power efficiency2.230.77
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameGF119G84
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date26 June 2012 (12 years ago)12 September 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$159 $699

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

NVS 310 and FX 1700 have a nearly equal value for money.

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 cores4832
Core clock speed523 MHz460 MHz
Number of transistors292 million289 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)20 Watt42 Watt
Texture fill rate4.1847.360
Floating-point processing power0.1004 TFLOPS0.05888 TFLOPS
ROPs48
TMUs816

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Length156 mm168 mm
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeDDR3DDR2
Maximum RAM amount512 MB512 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed875 MHz400 MHz
Memory bandwidth14 GB/s25.6 GB/s

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 Connectors2x DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x S-Video

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
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA2.11.1

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.

NVS 310 0.65
+38.3%
FX 1700 0.47

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.

NVS 310 251
+38.7%
FX 1700 181

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.65 0.47
Recency 26 June 2012 12 September 2007
Chip lithography 40 nm 80 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 20 Watt 42 Watt

NVS 310 has a 38.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 110% lower power consumption.

The NVS 310 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 1700 in performance tests.


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 NVS 310
NVS 310
NVIDIA Quadro FX 1700
Quadro FX 1700

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.


3.3 83 votes

Rate NVS 310 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 24 votes

Rate Quadro FX 1700 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.