CPU
GPU
Quadro FX 2700
Popular choices:
Radeon R5 M335
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 2700 is positioned at rank 203 and the Radeon R5 M335 is on rank 547, so the Quadro FX 2700 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 2700
Performance Per Dollar Radeon R5 M335
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon R5 M335 is significantly newer (2016 vs 2008). The Radeon R5 M335 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro FX 2700 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R5 M335 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.1% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro FX 2700.
| Insight | Quadro FX 2700 | Radeon R5 M335 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / 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 | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R5 M335 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R5 M335 holds the technical lead. Priced at $40 (vs $50), it costs 20% less, resulting in a 26.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro FX 2700 | Radeon R5 M335 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+26.4%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($50) | ✅More affordable ($40) |
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 2700 and Radeon R5 M335
Quadro FX 2700
The Quadro FX 2700 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: 543 points. Launch price was $3,499.
Radeon R5 M335
The Radeon R5 M335 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 15 2016. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 780 MHz to 1030 MHz. It has 320 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 549 points.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro FX 2700 scores 543 and the Radeon R5 M335 reaches 549 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro FX 2700 is built on Tesla 2.0 while the Radeon R5 M335 uses GCN 1.0, both on 55 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 240 (Quadro FX 2700) vs 320 (Radeon R5 M335). Raw compute: 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 2700) vs 0.6592 TFLOPS (Radeon R5 M335).
| Feature | Quadro FX 2700 | Radeon R5 M335 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 543 | 549+1% |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 240 | 320+33% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6221 TFLOPS | 0.6592 TFLOPS+6% |
| ROPs | 32+300% | 8 |
| TMUs | 80+300% | 20 |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB+100% | 128 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro FX 2700 | Radeon R5 M335 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 4 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (Quadro FX 2700) vs 128 KB (Radeon R5 M335) — the Quadro FX 2700 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro FX 2700 | Radeon R5 M335 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB+100% | 128 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro FX 2700 draws 189W versus the Radeon R5 M335's 75W — a 86.4% difference. The Radeon R5 M335 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX 2700) vs 350W (Radeon R5 M335). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Mobile.
| Feature | Quadro FX 2700 | Radeon R5 M335 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 189W | 75W-60% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Mobile |
| Perf/Watt | 2.9 | 7.3+152% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro FX 2700 launched at $100 MSRP and currently averages $50, while the Radeon R5 M335 launched at $150 and now averages $40. The Radeon R5 M335 costs 20% less ($10 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 10.9 (Quadro FX 2700) vs 13.7 (Radeon R5 M335) — the Radeon R5 M335 offers 25.7% better value. The Radeon R5 M335 is the newer GPU (2016 vs 2008).
| Feature | Quadro FX 2700 | Radeon R5 M335 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $100-33% | $150 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $50 | $40-20% |
| Performance per Dollar | 10.9 | 13.7+26% |
| Codename | GT200B | Jet |
| Release | November 11 2008 | May 15 2016 |
| Ranking | #815 | #922 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro FX 2700 and Radeon R5 M335
