GeForce 9200 vs Quadro FX 1700M

GeForce 9200

2016Core: 965 MHzBoost: 993 MHz

Quadro FX 1700M

2008Core: 610 MHz

Performance Spectrum - GPU

GeForce 9200

168

0.0%

GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile

GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU

Quadro FX 1700M

189

173

+3.0%

GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile

GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU

About G3D Mark

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 9200 is positioned at rank 562 and the Quadro FX 1700M is on rank 129, so the Quadro FX 1700M 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 9200

#552

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

3231%

#554

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

2929%

#555

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

2921%

#559

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

2657%

#560

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

2638%

#562

GeForce 9200

MSRP: $50|Avg: $15

100%

#563

Radeon HD 8450G + HD 8750M Dual

MSRP: $150|Avg: $150

100%

#564

Radeon R7 M265DX

MSRP: $149|Avg: $40

100%

#565

Radeon R9 M375

MSRP: $300|Avg: $300

99%

#567

Radeon HD 7520G + HD 7670M Dual

MSRP: $150|Avg: $150

98%

#568

Radeon HD 8550G + HD 8600/8700M Dual

MSRP: $200|Avg: $100

98%

#569

Radeon HD 8550G + HD 8750M Dual

MSRP: $250|Avg: $40

98%

#570

Radeon HD 8650G + HD 7600M Dual

MSRP: $250|Avg: $40

98%

#571

Radeon R5 M315

MSRP: $150|Avg: $150

97%

#572

Qualcomm Adreno 8cx Gen 3

MSRP: $599|Avg: $300

97%

#573

GeForce 9400 GT

MSRP: $59|Avg: $20

96%

#574

Radeon HD 8610G + HD 8600M Dual

MSRP: $150|Avg: $150

96%

#575

GeForce 240M GT

MSRP: $100|Avg: $5

95%

#576

Radeon HD 8450G + HD 8670M Dual

MSRP: $150|Avg: $150

95%

#577

GeForce 310

MSRP: $45|Avg: $5

95%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 1700M

#66

Radeon PRO W7800

MSRP: $2499|Avg: $2200

94%

#67

RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation

MSRP: $1999|Avg: $1450

90%

#114

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

1281%

#129

Quadro FX 1700M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#130

FirePro D300

MSRP: $500|Avg: $20

99%

#131

Radeon Pro WX 3200

MSRP: $199|Avg: $199

96%

#132

Radeon Pro WX 5100

MSRP: $499|Avg: $120

96%

#134

Quadro P2000 (móvel)

MSRP: $500|Avg: $150

93%

#135

Quadro P3000 (móvel)

MSRP: $600|Avg: $200

92%

#136

Quadro P3000

MSRP: $600|Avg: $80

92%

#139

Quadro T1000 (móvel)

MSRP: $500|Avg: $120

87%

#140

Radeon Pro V520

MSRP: $800|Avg: $300

87%

#141

Quadro M5500

MSRP: $800|Avg: $200

86%

#142

Quadro K1200

MSRP: $300|Avg: $184

86%

#143

Quadro P400

MSRP: $169|Avg: $60

85%

#144

Radeon Pro WX 7100

MSRP: $799|Avg: $180

84%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce 9200 is significantly newer (2016 vs 2008). The GeForce 9200 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro FX 1700M lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Quadro FX 1700M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 9200.

Insight	GeForce 9200	Quadro FX 1700M
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-3%)	✅Leading raw performance (+3%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Maxwell (2014−2017))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	—	—

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro FX 1700M 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 9200 Benchmark Check

Quadro FX 1700M Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce 9200 and Quadro FX 1700M

GeForce 9200

The GeForce 9200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 25 2016. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 965 MHz to 993 MHz. It has 256 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 16W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 168 points.

Quadro FX 1700M

The Quadro FX 1700M 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: 173 points. Launch price was $3,499.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce 9200 scores 168 and the Quadro FX 1700M reaches 173 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce 9200 is built on Maxwell while the Quadro FX 1700M uses Tesla 2.0, both on 28 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 256 (GeForce 9200) vs 240 (Quadro FX 1700M). Raw compute: 0.5084 TFLOPS (GeForce 9200) vs 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 1700M).

Feature	GeForce 9200	Quadro FX 1700M
G3D Mark Score	168	173+3%
Architecture	Maxwell	Tesla 2.0
Process Node	28 nm	55 nm
Shading Units	256+7%	240
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.5084 TFLOPS	0.6221 TFLOPS+22%
ROPs	8	32+300%
TMUs	24	80+233%
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	0.25 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce 9200	Quadro FX 1700M
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)

Both cards feature 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce 9200) vs 0.25 MB (Quadro FX 1700M) — the GeForce 9200 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce 9200	Quadro FX 1700M
VRAM Capacity	0.5 GB	0.5 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	128-bit+100%	64-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	0.25 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 10.0 (GeForce 9200) vs 11.1 (10_0) (Quadro FX 1700M). OpenGL: 3.3 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.

Feature	GeForce 9200	Quadro FX 1700M
DirectX	10.0	11.1 (10_0)+11%
OpenGL	3.3	3.3
Max Displays	2	2

🎬

Media & Encoding

Decoder: PureVideo HD (VP2) vs PureVideo HD. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce 9200) vs H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Quadro FX 1700M).

Feature	GeForce 9200	Quadro FX 1700M
Encoder	None	—
Decoder	PureVideo HD (VP2)	PureVideo HD
Codecs	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2	H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce 9200 draws 16W versus the Quadro FX 1700M's 189W — a 168.8% difference. The GeForce 9200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 9200) vs 350W (Quadro FX 1700M). Power connectors: Legacy vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 70 vs 85°C.