RTX A4500 Mobile vs Quadro FX 3700M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 3700M and RTX A4500 Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

FX 3700M
2008
1 GB GDDR3, 75 Watt
1.18

RTX A4500 Mobile outperforms FX 3700M by a whopping 3733% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking105676
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.01no data
Power efficiency1.0922.37
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameG92GA104
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date14 August 2008 (16 years ago)22 March 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$925 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 cores1285888
Core clock speed550 MHz930 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1500 MHz
Number of transistors754 million17,400 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt140 Watt
Texture fill rate35.20276.0
Floating-point processing power0.352 TFLOPS17.66 TFLOPS
ROPs1696
TMUs64184
Tensor Coresno data184
Ray Tracing Coresno data46

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
InterfaceMXM-HEPCIe 4.0 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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount1 GB16 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth51.2 GB/s512.0 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 outputsPortable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.7
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+8.6

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 3700M 1.18
RTX A4500 Mobile 45.23
+3733%

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 3700M 456
RTX A4500 Mobile 17451
+3727%

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 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−3400%
35−40
+3400%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−3567%
110−120
+3567%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−3400%
35−40
+3400%
Hitman 3 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−3650%
75−80
+3650%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+14.3%
27−30
−14.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−3400%
35−40
+3400%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−3567%
110−120
+3567%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−3400%
35−40
+3400%
Hitman 3 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−3650%
75−80
+3650%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+14.3%
27−30
−14.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−3400%
35−40
+3400%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−3400%
35−40
+3400%
Hitman 3 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+14.3%
27−30
−14.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−3650%
75−80
+3650%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−3400%
35−40
+3400%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−3650%
75−80
+3650%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−3400%
35−40
+3400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2
−3400%
35−40
+3400%
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 5−6
−3700%
190−200
+3700%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

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 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 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 Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the FX 3700M is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • FX 3700M is ahead in 27 tests (93%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (7%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.18 45.23
Recency 14 August 2008 22 March 2022
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 140 Watt

FX 3700M has 86.7% lower power consumption.

RTX A4500 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 3733.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 712.5% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX A4500 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 3700M 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 3700M
Quadro FX 3700M
NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile
RTX A4500 Mobile

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 2 votes

Rate Quadro FX 3700M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 17 votes

Rate RTX A4500 Mobile 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.