Quadro FX 2700M vs Radeon HD 6770M

Place in the ranking	831	1119
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.02
Power efficiency	4.97	1.02
Architecture	TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	Whistler	G94
Market segment	Laptop	Mobile workstation
Release date	4 January 2011 (13 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 cores	480	48
Core clock speed	725 MHz	530 MHz
Number of transistors	716 million	505 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	65 Watt
Texture fill rate	17.40	12.72
Floating-point processing power	0.696 TFLOPS	0.1272 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	16
TMUs	24	24

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	medium sized	large
Interface	MXM-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 type	GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	512 MB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	799 MHz
Memory bandwidth	57.6 GB/s	51.14 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 Connectors

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.2 (11_0)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	5.0	4.0
OpenGL	4.4	3.3
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	N/A	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.

HD 6770M 2.50
+163%

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.

HD 6770M 964
+163%

FX 2700M 366

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.

HD 6770M 6107
+118%

FX 2700M 2799

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	23 +188%	8−9 −188%
Full HD	24 +167%	9−10 −167%
1200p	12 +200%	4−5 −200%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

11.11

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

5−6
+66.7%

3−4

−66.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 +60%	5−6 −60%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Battlefield 5	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Far Cry 5	4−5	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +200%	4−5 −200%
Hitman 3	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 +53.8%	12−14 −53.8%
Metro Exodus	2−3	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 +57.1%	7−8 −57.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +19.4%	30−35 −19.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 +60%	5−6 −60%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Battlefield 5	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Far Cry 5	4−5	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +200%	4−5 −200%
Hitman 3	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 +53.8%	12−14 −53.8%
Metro Exodus	2−3	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 +57.1%	7−8 −57.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +30%	10−11 −30%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +19.4%	30−35 −19.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 +60%	5−6 −60%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Far Cry 5	4−5	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +200%	4−5 −200%
Hitman 3	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 +53.8%	12−14 −53.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 +57.1%	7−8 −57.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +30%	10−11 −30%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +19.4%	30−35 −19.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7
+500%

1−2

−500%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Hitman 3	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	14−16 +250%	4−5 −250%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7
+100%

3−4

−100%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
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	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	1−2	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5
+100%

2−3

−100%

This is how HD 6770M and FX 2700M compete in popular games:

HD 6770M is 188% faster in 900p
HD 6770M is 167% faster in 1080p
HD 6770M is 200% faster in 1200p

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

in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the HD 6770M is 500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

HD 6770M is ahead in 39 tests (98%)
there's a draw in 1 test (3%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.50	0.95
Recency	4 January 2011	14 August 2008
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	512 MB
Chip lithography	40 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	65 Watt

HD 6770M has a 163.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 62.5% more advanced lithography process, and 85.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon HD 6770M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 2700M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 6770M is a notebook graphics card while Quadro FX 2700M 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.