Quadro FX 2700M vs Quadro K510M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K510M and Quadro FX 2700M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro K510M
2013
1 GB GDDR5, 30 Watt
1.66
+74.7%

K510M outperforms FX 2700M by an impressive 75% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking9381113
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.02
Power efficiency3.991.05
ArchitectureKepler 2.0 (2013−2015)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameGK208G94
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date23 July 2013 (11 years ago)14 August 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$99.95

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 cores19248
Core clock speed846 MHz530 MHz
Number of transistors915 million505 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt65 Watt
Texture fill rate13.5412.72
Floating-point processing power0.3249 TFLOPS0.1272 TFLOPS
ROPs816
TMUs1624

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 sizemedium sizedlarge
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)MXM-HE

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB512 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed600 MHz799 MHz
Memory bandwidth19.2 GB/s51.14 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
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus+-
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1211.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.53.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA+1.1

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.

Quadro K510M 1.66
+74.7%
FX 2700M 0.95

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.

Quadro K510M 641
+75.1%
FX 2700M 366

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 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Hitman 3 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+23.1%
12−14
−23.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+9.7%
30−35
−9.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Hitman 3 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+23.1%
12−14
−23.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+9.7%
30−35
−9.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Hitman 3 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+23.1%
12−14
−23.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+9.7%
30−35
−9.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

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

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

  • in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Quadro K510M is 200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro K510M is ahead in 37 tests (93%)
  • there's a draw in 3 tests (8%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.66 0.95
Recency 23 July 2013 14 August 2008
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 65 Watt

Quadro K510M has a 74.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 132.1% more advanced lithography process, and 116.7% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K510M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 2700M 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 K510M
Quadro K510M
NVIDIA Quadro FX 2700M
Quadro FX 2700M

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.


2.5 2 votes

Rate Quadro K510M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 9 votes

Rate Quadro FX 2700M 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.