CPU
GPU
Quadro FX 1700M
Popular choices:
GeForce Go 7900 GS
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 Quadro FX 1700M is positioned at rank 129 and the GeForce Go 7900 GS is on rank 383, so the Quadro FX 1700M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 1700M
Performance Per Dollar GeForce Go 7900 GS
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce Go 7900 GS is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.9% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro FX 1700M offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Quadro FX 1700M | GeForce Go 7900 GS |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.9%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.9%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce Go 7900 GS 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 Quadro FX 1700M and GeForce Go 7900 GS
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.
GeForce Go 7900 GS
The GeForce Go 7900 GS is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 1 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 967 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 178 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro FX 1700M scores 173 and the GeForce Go 7900 GS reaches 178 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro FX 1700M is built on Tesla 2.0 while the GeForce Go 7900 GS uses Kepler, both on 55 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 240 (Quadro FX 1700M) vs 768 (GeForce Go 7900 GS).
| Feature | Quadro FX 1700M | GeForce Go 7900 GS |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 173 | 178+3% |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | Kepler |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 240 | 768+220% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro FX 1700M | GeForce Go 7900 GS |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Quadro FX 1700M comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce Go 7900 GS has 256 MB. The Quadro FX 1700M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | Quadro FX 1700M | GeForce Go 7900 GS |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB+100% | 0.25 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 11.1 (10_0) (Quadro FX 1700M) vs 9.0c (GeForce Go 7900 GS). OpenGL: 3.3 vs 2.1. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | Quadro FX 1700M | GeForce Go 7900 GS |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0)+23% | 9.0c |
| OpenGL | 3.3+57% | 2.1 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Decoder: PureVideo HD vs PureVideo. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Quadro FX 1700M) vs MPEG-2,WMV9,H.264 (GeForce Go 7900 GS).
| Feature | Quadro FX 1700M | GeForce Go 7900 GS |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | — | No |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD | PureVideo |
| Codecs | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 | MPEG-2,WMV9,H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro FX 1700M draws 189W versus the GeForce Go 7900 GS's 30W — a 145.2% difference. The GeForce Go 7900 GS is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX 1700M) vs 350W (GeForce Go 7900 GS). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 85°C.
| Feature | Quadro FX 1700M | GeForce Go 7900 GS |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 189W | 30W-84% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Legacy |
| Length | — | 0mm |
| Height | — | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 0.9 | 5.9+556% |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro FX 1700M and GeForce Go 7900 GS
