GeForce Go 7900 GTX vs Quadro FX 3500
GeForce Go 7900 GTX
Popular choices:
Quadro FX 3500
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - 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 Go 7900 GTX is positioned at rank 218 and the Quadro FX 3500 is on rank 408, so the GeForce Go 7900 GTX offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce Go 7900 GTX
Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 3500
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce Go 7900 GTX is significantly newer (2015 vs 2008). The GeForce Go 7900 GTX likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro FX 3500 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce Go 7900 GTX is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.9% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro FX 3500.
| Insight | GeForce Go 7900 GTX | Quadro FX 3500 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.9%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.9%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce Go 7900 GTX 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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce Go 7900 GTX and Quadro FX 3500
GeForce Go 7900 GTX
The GeForce Go 7900 GTX is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 2 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1000 MHz to 1075 MHz. It has 2816 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 270 points. Launch price was $649.
Quadro FX 3500
The Quadro FX 3500 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: 265 points. Launch price was $3,499.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce Go 7900 GTX scores 270 and the Quadro FX 3500 reaches 265 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce Go 7900 GTX is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Quadro FX 3500 uses Tesla 2.0, both on 28 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 2,816 (GeForce Go 7900 GTX) vs 240 (Quadro FX 3500). Raw compute: 6.06 TFLOPS (GeForce Go 7900 GTX) vs 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 3500).
| Feature | GeForce Go 7900 GTX | Quadro FX 3500 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 270+2% | 265 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 2816+1073% | 240 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 6.06 TFLOPS+874% | 0.6221 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 96+200% | 32 |
| TMUs | 176+120% | 80 |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB+1100% | 0.25 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce Go 7900 GTX | Quadro FX 3500 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 256 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 3 MB (GeForce Go 7900 GTX) vs 0.25 MB (Quadro FX 3500) — the GeForce Go 7900 GTX has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce Go 7900 GTX | Quadro FX 3500 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.25 GB | 0.25 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB+1100% | 0.25 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce Go 7900 GTX draws 250W versus the Quadro FX 3500's 189W — a 27.8% difference. The Quadro FX 3500 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce Go 7900 GTX) vs 350W (Quadro FX 3500). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | GeForce Go 7900 GTX | Quadro FX 3500 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 250W | 189W-24% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | — |
| Height | 0mm | — |
| Slots | 0 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 1.1 | 1.4+27% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce Go 7900 GTX is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2008).
| Feature | GeForce Go 7900 GTX | Quadro FX 3500 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $1599 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $1599 |
| Codename | GM200 | GT200B |
| Release | June 2 2015 | November 11 2008 |
| Ranking | #179 | #815 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce Go 7900 GTX and Quadro FX 3500
