Radeon R2E vs Quadro FX 1700
Radeon R2E
Popular choices:
Quadro FX 1700
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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 1700
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro FX 1700 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 R2E.
| Insight | Radeon R2E | Quadro FX 1700 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.4%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R2E offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R2E holds the technical lead. Priced at $49 (vs $500), it costs 90% less, resulting in a 896.8% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon R2E | Quadro FX 1700 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+896.8%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($49) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($500) |
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 R2E and Quadro FX 1700
Radeon R2E
The Radeon R2E is manufactured by AMD. It was released in December 20 2013. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 800 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 55W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 211 points. Launch price was $109.
Quadro FX 1700
The Quadro FX 1700 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: 216 points. Launch price was $3,499.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R2E scores 211 and the Quadro FX 1700 reaches 216 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R2E is built on GCN 1.0 while the Quadro FX 1700 uses Tesla 2.0, both on 28 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 512 (Radeon R2E) vs 240 (Quadro FX 1700). Raw compute: 0.8192 TFLOPS (Radeon R2E) vs 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 1700).
| Feature | Radeon R2E | Quadro FX 1700 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 211 | 216+2% |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 512+113% | 240 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.8192 TFLOPS+32% | 0.6221 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 32+100% |
| TMUs | 32 | 80+150% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R2E | Quadro FX 1700 |
|---|---|---|
| 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: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Radeon R2E | Quadro FX 1700 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R2E draws 55W versus the Quadro FX 1700's 189W — a 109.8% difference. The Radeon R2E is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon R2E) vs 350W (Quadro FX 1700). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Radeon R2E | Quadro FX 1700 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 55W-71% | 189W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 168mm |
| Slots | — | 1 |
| Perf/Watt | 3.8+245% | 1.1 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R2E launched at $0 MSRP and currently averages $49, while the Quadro FX 1700 launched at $699 and now averages $500. The Radeon R2E costs 90.2% less ($451 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 4.3 (Radeon R2E) vs 0.4 (Quadro FX 1700) — the Radeon R2E offers 975% better value. The Radeon R2E is the newer GPU (2013 vs 2008).
| Feature | Radeon R2E | Quadro FX 1700 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $0-100% | $699 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $49-90% | $500 |
| Performance per Dollar | 4.3+975% | 0.4 |
| Codename | Cape Verde | GT200B |
| Release | December 20 2013 | November 11 2008 |
| Ranking | #738 | #815 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon R2E and Quadro FX 1700
