Radeon HD 3670 vs Quadro FX 1700M
Radeon HD 3670
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 Radeon HD 3670 is positioned at rank 320 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 Radeon HD 3670
Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 1700M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro FX 1700M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.4% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon HD 3670.
| Insight | Radeon HD 3670 | Quadro FX 1700M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.4%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro FX 1700M 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 Radeon HD 3670 and Quadro FX 1700M
Radeon HD 3670
The Radeon HD 3670 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: 169 points. Launch price was $369.
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 Radeon HD 3670 scores 169 and the Quadro FX 1700M reaches 173 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon HD 3670 is built on TeraScale 3 while the Quadro FX 1700M uses Tesla 2.0, both on 40 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 1,536 (Radeon HD 3670) vs 240 (Quadro FX 1700M). Raw compute: 2.703 TFLOPS (Radeon HD 3670) vs 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 1700M).
| Feature | Radeon HD 3670 | Quadro FX 1700M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 169 | 173+2% |
| Architecture | TeraScale 3 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 1536+540% | 240 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.703 TFLOPS+334% | 0.6221 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 96+20% | 80 |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon HD 3670 | 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 | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (Radeon HD 3670) vs 256 KB (Quadro FX 1700M) — the Radeon HD 3670 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon HD 3670 | Quadro FX 1700M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.1 (Radeon HD 3670) vs 11.1 (10_0) (Quadro FX 1700M). Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 2.
| Feature | Radeon HD 3670 | Quadro FX 1700M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.1 | 11.1 (10_0)+10% |
| Max Displays | 0 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Decoder: UVD vs PureVideo HD.
| Feature | Radeon HD 3670 | Quadro FX 1700M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | UVD | — |
| Decoder | UVD | PureVideo HD |
| Codecs | — | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon HD 3670 draws 250W versus the Quadro FX 1700M's 189W — a 27.8% difference. The Quadro FX 1700M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon HD 3670) vs 350W (Quadro FX 1700M). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Radeon HD 3670 | Quadro FX 1700M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 250W | 189W-24% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 1mm | — |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 0.7 | 0.9+29% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon HD 3670 is the newer GPU (2010 vs 2008).
| Feature | Radeon HD 3670 | Quadro FX 1700M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $100 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15 | — |
| Codename | Cayman | GT200B |
| Release | December 14 2010 | November 11 2008 |
| Ranking | #596 | #815 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon HD 3670 and Quadro FX 1700M
