CPU
GPU
Quadro FX 1700
Popular choices:
Radeon R2E
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. The Quadro FX 1700 is positioned at rank #395 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 1700
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro FX 1700 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.4% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R2E.
| Insight | Quadro FX 1700 | Radeon R2E |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.4%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R2E offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R2E holds the technical lead. Priced at $49 (vs $500), it costs 90% less, resulting in a 896.8% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro FX 1700 | Radeon R2E |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+896.8%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($500) | ✅More affordable ($49) |
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 Quadro FX 1700 and Radeon R2E
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.
Radeon R2E
The Radeon R2E is manufactured by AMD. It was released in December 20 2013. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 800 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 55W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 211 points. Launch price was $109.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro FX 1700 scores 216 and the Radeon R2E reaches 211 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro FX 1700 is built on Tesla 2.0 while the Radeon R2E uses GCN 1.0, both on 55 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 240 (Quadro FX 1700) vs 512 (Radeon R2E). Raw compute: 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 1700) vs 0.8192 TFLOPS (Radeon R2E).
| Feature | Quadro FX 1700 | Radeon R2E |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 216+2% | 211 |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 240 | 512+113% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6221 TFLOPS | 0.8192 TFLOPS+32% |
| ROPs | 32+100% | 16 |
| TMUs | 80+150% | 32 |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro FX 1700 | Radeon R2E |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Quadro FX 1700 | Radeon R2E |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro FX 1700 draws 189W versus the Radeon R2E's 55W — a 109.8% difference. The Radeon R2E is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX 1700) vs 350W (Radeon R2E). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Quadro FX 1700 | Radeon R2E |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 189W | 55W-71% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 168mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 1.1 | 3.8+245% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro FX 1700 launched at $699 MSRP and currently averages $500, while the Radeon R2E launched at $0 and now averages $49. The Radeon R2E costs 90.2% less ($451 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 0.4 (Quadro FX 1700) vs 4.3 (Radeon R2E) — the Radeon R2E offers 975% better value. The Radeon R2E is the newer GPU (2013 vs 2008).
| Feature | Quadro FX 1700 | Radeon R2E |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $699 | $0-100% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $500 | $49-90% |
| Performance per Dollar | 0.4 | 4.3+975% |
| Codename | GT200B | Cape Verde |
| Release | November 11 2008 | December 20 2013 |
| Ranking | #815 | #738 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro FX 1700 and Radeon R2E
