GeForce GTX 670M vs Quadro P400

Place in the ranking	680	660
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	2.50	no data
Power efficiency	9.84	4.18
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code name	GP107	GF114
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	7 February 2017 (7 years ago)	22 March 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$119.99	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 cores	256	336
Core clock speed	1228 MHz	598 MHz
Boost clock speed	1252 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	3,300 million	1,950 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	30 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	20.03	33.49
Floating-point processing power	0.641 TFLOPS	0.8037 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	24
TMUs	16	56

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	no data	large
Bus support	no data	PCI Express 2.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-B (3.0)
Length	145 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	no data
SLI options	-	+

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	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1536 MB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	192bit
Memory clock speed	1002 MHz	1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	32.06 GB/s	72.0 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 Connectors	3x mini-DisplayPort	No outputs
HDMI	-	+
HDCP	-	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	Up to 2048x1536

Supported technologies

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

Optimus

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 API
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.5
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	N/A
CUDA	6.1	+

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 P400 4.29

GTX 670M 4.55
+6.1%

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 P400 1648

GTX 670M 1750
+6.2%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Quadro P400 5628

GTX 670M 6467
+14.9%

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:

900p	35−40 −11.4%	39 +11.4%
Full HD	35−40 −14.3%	40 +14.3%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

3.43

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Elden Ring	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Metro Exodus	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Valorant	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Dota 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Elden Ring	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Fortnite	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Metro Exodus	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Valorant	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
World of Tanks	91 +0%	91 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Dota 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Valorant	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Elden Ring	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
World of Tanks	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Metro Exodus	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Valorant	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Elden Ring	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Far Cry 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Fortnite	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Valorant	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%

This is how Quadro P400 and GTX 670M compete in popular games:

GTX 670M is 11% faster in 900p
GTX 670M is 14% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	4.29	4.55
Recency	7 February 2017	22 March 2012
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1536 MB
Chip lithography	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	30 Watt	75 Watt

Quadro P400 has an age advantage of 4 years, a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 150% lower power consumption.

GTX 670M, on the other hand, has a 6.1% higher aggregate performance score.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro P400 and GeForce GTX 670M.

Be aware that Quadro P400 is a workstation card while GeForce GTX 670M is a notebook one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.