Quadro FX 4700 X2 vs GeForce GTS 160M

Quadro FX 4700 X2

2008Core: 602 MHz

GeForce GTS 160M

2012Core: Up to 900 MHzBoost: 950 MHz

Performance Spectrum - GPU

Quadro FX 4700 X2

150

676

0.0%

GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB

GeForce GTX 1070 Ti

GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER

GeForce GTS 160M

679

+0.4%

GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB

GeForce GTX 1070 Ti

GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER

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 4700 X2 is positioned at rank 401 and the GeForce GTS 160M is on rank 275, so the GeForce GTS 160M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 4700 X2

#386

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

64230%

#401

Quadro FX 4700 X2

MSRP: $2999|Avg: $15

100%

#402

Quadro FX 3700

MSRP: $1599|Avg: $500

100%

#403

GRID M10-0B

MSRP: $4000|Avg: $1000

96%

#404

Quadro FX 4600

MSRP: $1999|Avg: $50

87%

#406

GRID K340

MSRP: $3299|Avg: $57

87%

#407

Quadro FX 5600

MSRP: $2999|Avg: $50

78%

#409

Quadro FX 3500

MSRP: $1599|Avg: $1599

74%

#410

Quadro FX 1400

MSRP: $799|Avg: $30

70%

#411

GRID K1

MSRP: $4140|Avg: $120

70%

#413

GRID P4-1Q

MSRP: $5890|Avg: $185

52%

#414

GRID RTX6000-2Q

MSRP: $6300|Avg: $1500

43%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTS 160M

#265

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

639%

#267

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

580%

#268

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

578%

#272

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

526%

#273

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

522%

#275

GeForce GTS 160M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $30

100%

#276

GeForce GTX 470M SLI

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $60

100%

#277

Radeon Vega 8 Ryzen 3 3200G

MSRP: $99|Avg: $70

99%

#279

Radeon RX Vega 9

MSRP: $99|Avg: $50

99%

#282

Iris Xe Graphics G7

MSRP: $200|Avg: $100

98%

#283

Radeon R9 M395

MSRP: $300|Avg: $300

97%

#285

GeForce GT 755M SLI

MSRP: $200|Avg: $50

97%

#287

GeForce GTX 950A

MSRP: $159|Avg: $30

96%

#288

Radeon 540X

MSRP: $99|Avg: $40

94%

#289

GeForce 930MX

MSRP: $80|Avg: $25

94%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTS 160M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.4% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro FX 4700 X2 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.

Insight	Quadro FX 4700 X2	GeForce GTS 160M
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.4%)	✅Leading raw performance (+0.4%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	✅ More VRAM (+300%)	❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	—	—

💎 Value Proposition

The Quadro FX 4700 X2 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Quadro FX 4700 X2 holds the technical lead. Priced at $15 (vs $30), it costs 50% less, resulting in a 99.1% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	Quadro FX 4700 X2	GeForce GTS 160M
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+99.1%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($15)	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($30)

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.

Quadro FX 4700 X2 Benchmark Check

GeForce GTS 160M Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Quadro FX 4700 X2 and GeForce GTS 160M

Quadro FX 4700 X2

The Quadro FX 4700 X2 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 11 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 602 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 676 points. Launch price was $1,799.

GeForce GTS 160M

The GeForce GTS 160M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 22 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from Up to 900 MHz to 950 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 45W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 679 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Quadro FX 4700 X2 scores 676 and the GeForce GTS 160M reaches 679 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro FX 4700 X2 is built on Tesla 2.0 while the GeForce GTS 160M uses Kepler, both on 55 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 192 (Quadro FX 4700 X2) vs 384 (GeForce GTS 160M). Raw compute: 0.4623 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 4700 X2) vs 0.7296 TFLOPS (GeForce GTS 160M).

Feature	Quadro FX 4700 X2	GeForce GTS 160M
G3D Mark Score	676	679
Architecture	Tesla 2.0	Kepler
Process Node	55 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	192	384+100%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.4623 TFLOPS	0.7296 TFLOPS+58%
ROPs	24+50%	16
TMUs	64+100%	32
L2 Cache	192 KB	256 KB+33%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro FX 4700 X2	GeForce GTS 160M
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 4700 X2 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTS 160M has 1 GB. The Quadro FX 4700 X2 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 192 KB (Quadro FX 4700 X2) vs 256 KB (GeForce GTS 160M) — the GeForce GTS 160M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Quadro FX 4700 X2	GeForce GTS 160M
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+300%	1 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	128-bit+100%
L2 Cache	192 KB	256 KB+33%

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro FX 4700 X2 draws 150W versus the GeForce GTS 160M's 45W — a 107.7% difference. The GeForce GTS 160M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX 4700 X2) vs 350W (GeForce GTS 160M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy.

Feature	Quadro FX 4700 X2	GeForce GTS 160M
TDP	150W	45W-70%
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	Legacy
Slots	—	0
Temp (Load)	—	90°C
Perf/Watt	4.5	15.1+236%

💰

Value Analysis

The Quadro FX 4700 X2 costs 50% less ($15 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 45.1 (Quadro FX 4700 X2) vs 22.6 (GeForce GTS 160M) — the Quadro FX 4700 X2 offers 99.6% better value. The GeForce GTS 160M is the newer GPU (2012 vs 2008).