Quadro FX 2700M vs GeForce GTS 350M
Quadro FX 2700M
Popular choices:
GeForce GTS 350M
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 2700M is positioned at rank 237 and the GeForce GTS 350M is on rank 162, so the GeForce GTS 350M 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 2700M
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTS 350M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTS 350M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.8% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (1 GB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro FX 2700M.
| Insight | Quadro FX 2700M | GeForce GTS 350M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.8%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.8%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / Fermi (2010−2014)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GTS 350M 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 2700M and GeForce GTS 350M
Quadro FX 2700M
The Quadro FX 2700M 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: 367 points. Launch price was $3,499.
GeForce GTS 350M
The GeForce GTS 350M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in September 13 2010. It features the Fermi architecture. The core clock speed is 783 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 106W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 381 points. Launch price was $129.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro FX 2700M scores 367 and the GeForce GTS 350M reaches 381 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro FX 2700M is built on Tesla 2.0 while the GeForce GTS 350M uses Fermi, both on 55 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 240 (Quadro FX 2700M) vs 192 (GeForce GTS 350M). Raw compute: 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 2700M) vs 0.6013 TFLOPS (GeForce GTS 350M).
| Feature | Quadro FX 2700M | GeForce GTS 350M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 367 | 381+4% |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | Fermi |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 240+25% | 192 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6221 TFLOPS+3% | 0.6013 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32+100% | 16 |
| TMUs | 80+150% | 32 |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro FX 2700M | GeForce GTS 350M |
|---|---|---|
| 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 2700M comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTS 350M has 1 GB. The GeForce GTS 350M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | Quadro FX 2700M | GeForce GTS 350M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 1 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro FX 2700M draws 189W versus the GeForce GTS 350M's 106W — a 56.3% difference. The GeForce GTS 350M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX 2700M) vs 350W (GeForce GTS 350M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy.
| Feature | Quadro FX 2700M | GeForce GTS 350M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 189W | 106W-44% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Legacy |
| Slots | — | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 1.9 | 3.6+89% |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro FX 2700M and GeForce GTS 350M
