ATI Mobility FireGL V5700 vs Quadro FX 2700M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 2700M and Mobility FireGL V5700, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

FX 2700M
2008
512 MB GDDR3, 65 Watt
0.95
+188%

FX 2700M outperforms ATI Mobility FireGL V5700 by a whopping 188% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11181296
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.02no data
Power efficiency1.02no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameG94M86
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date14 August 2008 (16 years ago)7 January 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$99.95 no data

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 cores48120
Core clock speed530 MHz600 MHz
Number of transistors505 million378 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Wattno data
Texture fill rate12.724.800
Floating-point processing power0.1272 TFLOPS0.144 TFLOPS
ROPs164
TMUs248

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 sizelargemedium sized
InterfaceMXM-HEPCIe 2.0 x16

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 typeGDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount512 MB512 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed799 MHz700 MHz
Memory bandwidth51.14 GB/s22.4 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 outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model4.04.1
OpenGL3.33.3
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
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 2700M 0.95
+188%
ATI Mobility FireGL V5700 0.33

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.

FX 2700M 2799
+175%
ATI Mobility FireGL V5700 1017

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+10.7%
27−30
−10.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+10.7%
27−30
−10.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+10.7%
27−30
−10.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

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

  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the FX 2700M is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • FX 2700M is ahead in 27 tests (93%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (7%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.95 0.33
Recency 14 August 2008 7 January 2008
Chip lithography 65 nm 55 nm

FX 2700M has a 187.9% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 7 months.

ATI Mobility FireGL V5700, on the other hand, has a 18.2% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro FX 2700M is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility FireGL V5700 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 Quadro FX 2700M
Quadro FX 2700M
ATI Mobility FireGL V5700
Mobility FireGL V5700

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.


3.1 9 votes

Rate Quadro FX 2700M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Mobility FireGL V5700 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.