GeForce 320M vs Quadro FX 1700

G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce 320M is positioned at rank 101 and the Quadro FX 1700 is on rank 395, so the GeForce 320M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce 320M

#30

Radeon 8050S

MSRP: $400|Avg: $400

97%

#31

Radeon RX 8050S

MSRP: $400|Avg: $400

96%

#91

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

259%

#93

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

234%

#94

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

234%

#98

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

213%

#99

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

211%

#101

GeForce 320M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#103

Radeon RX 460 (móvel)

MSRP: $99|Avg: $45

99%

#105

GeForce GTX 680M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

98%

#106

Radeon HD 7470M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $12

97%

#110

GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

96%

#114

Radeon RX 470 (móvel)

MSRP: $179|Avg: $40

93%

#116

GeForce GTX 880M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

91%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 1700

#380

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

47655%

#395

Quadro FX 1700

MSRP: $699|Avg: $500

100%

#396

GRID P40-6Q

MSRP: $3000|Avg: $150

97%

#397

Quadro FX 540

MSRP: $299|Avg: $15

87%

#398

Tesla M2070-Q

MSRP: $5489|Avg: $50

77%

#399

Quadro FX 1500

MSRP: $699|Avg: $30

77%

#400

Quadro 7000

MSRP: $14499|Avg: $300

77%

#401

Quadro FX 3700

MSRP: $1599|Avg: $500

74%

#402

Quadro FX 4700 X2

MSRP: $2999|Avg: $15

74%

#403

GRID M10-0B

MSRP: $4000|Avg: $1000

71%

#404

Quadro FX 4600

MSRP: $1999|Avg: $50

65%

#405

GRID K340

MSRP: $3299|Avg: $57

65%

#407

Quadro FX 5600

MSRP: $2999|Avg: $50

58%

#408

Quadro FX 3500

MSRP: $1599|Avg: $1599

55%

#410

Quadro FX 1400

MSRP: $799|Avg: $30

52%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce 320M is significantly newer (2015 vs 2008). The GeForce 320M likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro FX 1700 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Quadro FX 1700 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.9% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (512 MB vs 256 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 320M.

Insight	GeForce 320M	Quadro FX 1700
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.9%)	✅Leading raw performance (+2.9%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+100%)
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	—	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro FX 1700 remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.

Performance Check

Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.

Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

GeForce 320M Benchmark Check

Quadro FX 1700 Benchmark Check

Loading...

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce 320M and Quadro FX 1700

GeForce 320M

The GeForce 320M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 13 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 549 MHz to 549 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 210 points.

Quadro FX 1700

The Quadro FX 1700 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 11 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 610 MHz. It has 240 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 189W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 216 points. Launch price was $3,499.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce 320M scores 210 and the Quadro FX 1700 reaches 216 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce 320M is built on Maxwell while the Quadro FX 1700 uses Tesla 2.0, both on 28 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce 320M) vs 240 (Quadro FX 1700). Raw compute: 0.4216 TFLOPS (GeForce 320M) vs 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 1700).

Feature	GeForce 320M	Quadro FX 1700
G3D Mark Score	210	216+3%
Architecture	Maxwell	Tesla 2.0
Process Node	28 nm	55 nm
Shading Units	384+60%	240
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.4216 TFLOPS	0.6221 TFLOPS+48%
ROPs	8	32+300%
TMUs	24	80+233%
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	0.25 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce 320M	Quadro FX 1700
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce 320M comes with 256 MB of VRAM, while the Quadro FX 1700 has 512 MB. The Quadro FX 1700 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce 320M) vs 0.25 MB (Quadro FX 1700) — the GeForce 320M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce 320M	Quadro FX 1700
VRAM Capacity	0.25 GB	0.5 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	128-bit+100%	64-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	0.25 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 10.1 (GeForce 320M) vs 10_0 (Quadro FX 1700). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.

Feature	GeForce 320M	Quadro FX 1700
DirectX	10.1	10_0
Max Displays	2	2

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce 320M draws 33W versus the Quadro FX 1700's 189W — a 140.5% difference. The GeForce 320M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 320M) vs 350W (Quadro FX 1700). Power connectors: Legacy vs PCIe-powered.