Quadro FX 380 vs Quadro FX 1700M
Quadro FX 380
Popular choices:
Quadro FX 1700M
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 380 is positioned at rank 327 and the Quadro FX 1700M is on rank 129, 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 380
Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 1700M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro FX 380 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.3% 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 380 | Quadro FX 1700M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.3%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro FX 380 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 380 and Quadro FX 1700M
Quadro FX 380
The Quadro FX 380 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: 177 points. Launch price was $3,499.
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.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro FX 380 scores 177 and the Quadro FX 1700M reaches 173 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro FX 380 is built on Tesla 2.0 while the Quadro FX 1700M uses Tesla 2.0, both on a 55 nm process. Shader units: 240 (Quadro FX 380) vs 240 (Quadro FX 1700M). Raw compute: 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 380) vs 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 1700M).
| Feature | Quadro FX 380 | Quadro FX 1700M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 177+2% | 173 |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 240 | 240 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6221 TFLOPS | 0.6221 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 80 | 80 |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro FX 380 | Quadro FX 1700M |
|---|---|---|
| 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 380 comes with 256 MB of VRAM, while the Quadro FX 1700M has 512 MB. The Quadro FX 1700M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Quadro FX 380 | Quadro FX 1700M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.25 GB | 0.5 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10_0 (Quadro FX 380) vs 11.1 (10_0) (Quadro FX 1700M). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | Quadro FX 380 | Quadro FX 1700M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10_0 | 11.1 (10_0)+11% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro FX 380 draws 189W versus the Quadro FX 1700M's 189W — a 0% difference. The Quadro FX 1700M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX 380) vs 350W (Quadro FX 1700M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Quadro FX 380 | Quadro FX 1700M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 189W | 189W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 168mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | — | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 0.9 | 0.9 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro FX 380 and Quadro FX 1700M
