Radeon RX 6600 vs Quadro FX 1700

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 1700 with Radeon RX 6600, including specs and performance data.

FX 1700
2007
512 MB DDR2, 42 Watt
0.50

RX 6600 outperforms FX 1700 by a whopping 7772% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1238116
Place by popularitynot in top-10014
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data66.82
Power efficiency0.8220.56
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameG84Navi 23
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date12 September 2007 (17 years ago)13 October 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$699 $329

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

FX 1700 and RX 6600 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 cores321792
Core clock speed460 MHz1626 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2491 MHz
Number of transistors289 million11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)42 Watt132 Watt
Texture fill rate7.360279.0
Floating-point processing power0.05888 TFLOPS8.928 TFLOPS
ROPs864
TMUs16112
Ray Tracing Coresno data28

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 1.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length168 mm190 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 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 typeDDR2GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount512 MB8 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed400 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth25.6 GB/s224.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 DVI, 1x S-Video1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12.0 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.5
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.12.1
VulkanN/A1.2
CUDA1.1-

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.

FX 1700 0.50
RX 6600 39.36
+7772%

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.

FX 1700 191
RX 6600 15129
+7821%

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 HD1−2
−11000%
111
+11000%
1440p0−156
4K-0−131

Cost per frame, $

1080p699.00
−23483%
2.96
+23483%
1440pno data5.88
4Kno data10.61
  • RX 6600 has 23483% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 111
+0%
111
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 107
+0%
107
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 84
+0%
84
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 81
+0%
81
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 225
+0%
225
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 123
+0%
123
+0%
Metro Exodus 140
+0%
140
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 68
+0%
68
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 69
+0%
69
+0%
Dota 2 141
+0%
141
+0%
Far Cry 5 62
+0%
62
+0%
Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 182
+0%
182
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 98
+0%
98
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 137
+0%
137
+0%
Metro Exodus 98
+0%
98
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
World of Tanks 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 59
+0%
59
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 56
+0%
56
+0%
Dota 2 107
+0%
107
+0%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 157
+0%
157
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 85
+0%
85
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 64
+0%
64
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 64
+0%
64
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
World of Tanks 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 33
+0%
33
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 32
+0%
32
+0%
Far Cry 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 101
+0%
101
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 60
+0%
60
+0%
Metro Exodus 97
+0%
97
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 20
+0%
20
+0%
Dota 2 60
+0%
60
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 60
+0%
60
+0%
Metro Exodus 29
+0%
29
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60
+0%
60
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12
+0%
12
+0%
Dota 2 85
+0%
85
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 53
+0%
53
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 29
+0%
29
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

This is how FX 1700 and RX 6600 compete in popular games:

  • RX 6600 is 11000% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.50 39.36
Recency 12 September 2007 13 October 2021
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 80 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 42 Watt 132 Watt

FX 1700 has 214.3% lower power consumption.

RX 6600, on the other hand, has a 7772% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1042.9% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 1700 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 1700 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 6600 is a desktop 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 Quadro FX 1700
Quadro FX 1700
AMD Radeon RX 6600
Radeon RX 6600

Other comparisons

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.


2.7 24 votes

Rate Quadro FX 1700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 10235 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6600 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.