CPU
GPU
Quadro FX 2700M
Popular choices:
Radeon HD4670
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 Radeon HD4670 is on rank 216, so the Radeon HD4670 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 Radeon HD4670
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro FX 2700M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon HD4670.
| Insight | Quadro FX 2700M | Radeon HD4670 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.3%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro FX 2700M 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 Radeon HD4670
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.
Radeon HD4670
The Radeon HD4670 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in December 14 2010. It features the TeraScale 3 architecture. The boost clock speed is 880 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 366 points. Launch price was $369.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro FX 2700M scores 367 and the Radeon HD4670 reaches 366 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro FX 2700M is built on Tesla 2.0 while the Radeon HD4670 uses TeraScale 3, both on 55 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 240 (Quadro FX 2700M) vs 1,536 (Radeon HD4670). Raw compute: 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 2700M) vs 2.703 TFLOPS (Radeon HD4670).
| Feature | Quadro FX 2700M | Radeon HD4670 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 367 | 366 |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | TeraScale 3 |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 240 | 1536+540% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6221 TFLOPS | 2.703 TFLOPS+334% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 80 | 96+20% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro FX 2700M | Radeon HD4670 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 128-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (Quadro FX 2700M) vs 512 KB (Radeon HD4670) — the Radeon HD4670 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro FX 2700M | Radeon HD4670 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro FX 2700M draws 189W versus the Radeon HD4670's 250W — a 27.8% difference. The Quadro FX 2700M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX 2700M) vs 300W (Radeon HD4670). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None.
| Feature | Quadro FX 2700M | Radeon HD4670 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 189W-24% | 250W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 300W-14% |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | None |
| Perf/Watt | 1.9+27% | 1.5 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon HD4670 is the newer GPU (2010 vs 2008).
| Feature | Quadro FX 2700M | Radeon HD4670 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $67 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $15 |
| Codename | GT200B | Cayman |
| Release | November 11 2008 | December 14 2010 |
| Ranking | #815 | #596 |
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 Radeon HD4670
