Arc 7-Cores iGPU vs Quadro FX 1700M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro FX 1700M with Arc 7-Cores iGPU, including specs and performance data.
Arc 7-Cores iGPU outperforms FX 1700M by a whopping 3775% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1246 | 323 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 0.62 | no data |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | Xe LPG (2023) |
| GPU code name | G96 | Meteor Lake iGPU |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 1 October 2008 (16 years ago) | 14 December 2023 (1 year ago) |
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 | 32 | 7 |
| Core clock speed | 625 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2200 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 314 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 10.00 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.0992 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 8 | no data |
| TMUs | 16 | no data |
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 | large | no data |
| Interface | MXM-II | no data |
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 | GDDR3 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | no data |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | no data |
| Memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | no data |
| 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 data |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12_2 |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | no data |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | no data |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | no data |
| Vulkan | N/A | - |
| CUDA | 1.1 | - |
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 HD | 0−1 | 34 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−1400%
|
90
+1400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−3567%
|
110−120
+3567%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−867%
|
58
+867%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−3567%
|
110−120
+3567%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−1083%
|
70−75
+1083%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
−925%
|
40−45
+925%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−417%
|
31
+417%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−3567%
|
110−120
+3567%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9
−325%
|
34
+325%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−1083%
|
70−75
+1083%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−1614%
|
120−130
+1614%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
−925%
|
40−45
+925%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−940%
|
52
+940%
|
| World of Tanks | 14−16
−1313%
|
210−220
+1313%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−3733%
|
230−240
+3733%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−3567%
|
110−120
+3567%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9
−338%
|
35
+338%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−1083%
|
70−75
+1083%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−1614%
|
120−130
+1614%
|
1440p
High Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−3650%
|
75−80
+3650%
|
| World of Tanks | 0−1 | 0−1 |
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−3567%
|
110−120
+3567%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−1000%
|
40−45
+1000%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−500%
|
24−27
+500%
|
| Valorant | 5−6
−3700%
|
190−200
+3700%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−33.3%
|
8−9
+33.3%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−3567%
|
550−600
+3567%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−93.3%
|
27−30
+93.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
−3400%
|
35−40
+3400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−93.3%
|
27−30
+93.3%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 16−18 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−3733%
|
230−240
+3733%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−3650%
|
75−80
+3650%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−93.3%
|
27−30
+93.3%
|
| Valorant | 1−2
−3400%
|
35−40
+3400%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 38
+0%
|
38
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Valorant | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 71
+0%
|
71
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 23
+0%
|
23
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| Valorant | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 66
+0%
|
66
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 22
+0%
|
22
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Metro Exodus | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
| Valorant | 20−22
+0%
|
20−22
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 20−22
+0%
|
20−22
+0%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Arc 7-Cores iGPU is 1614% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Arc 7-Cores iGPU is ahead in 20 tests (39%)
- there's a draw in 31 test (61%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.44 | 17.05 |
| Recency | 1 October 2008 | 14 December 2023 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 5 nm |
Arc 7-Cores iGPU has a 3775% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, and a 1200% more advanced lithography process.
The Arc 7-Cores iGPU is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 1700M in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro FX 1700M is a mobile workstation card while Arc 7-Cores iGPU 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.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
