CPU
GPU
Radeon R5 230
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. The Radeon R5 230 is positioned at rank 500 and the Quadro FX 1700 is on rank 395, so the Quadro FX 1700 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon R5 230
Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 1700
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon R5 230 is significantly newer (2017 vs 2008). The Radeon R5 230 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro FX 1700 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R5 230 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.8% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro FX 1700.
| Insight | Radeon R5 230 | Quadro FX 1700 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.8%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.8%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑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 | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R5 230 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R5 230 holds the technical lead. Priced at $25 (vs $500), it costs 95% less, resulting in a 1955.6% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon R5 230 | Quadro FX 1700 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+1955.6%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($25) | ⚠️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 R5 230 and Quadro FX 1700
Radeon R5 230
The Radeon R5 230 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in April 18 2017. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 730 MHz to 1024 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 222 points.
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 R5 230 scores 222 and the Quadro FX 1700 reaches 216 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R5 230 is built on GCN 3.0 while the Quadro FX 1700 uses Tesla 2.0, both on 28 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 384 (Radeon R5 230) vs 240 (Quadro FX 1700). Raw compute: 0.7864 TFLOPS (Radeon R5 230) vs 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 1700).
| Feature | Radeon R5 230 | Quadro FX 1700 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 222+3% | 216 |
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 384+60% | 240 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.7864 TFLOPS+26% | 0.6221 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 32+300% |
| TMUs | 24 | 80+233% |
| L2 Cache | 128 KB | 256 KB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R5 230 | 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: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 128 KB (Radeon R5 230) vs 256 KB (Quadro FX 1700) — the Quadro FX 1700 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon R5 230 | Quadro FX 1700 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 128 KB | 256 KB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 11.2 (Radeon R5 230) vs 10_0 (Quadro FX 1700). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | Radeon R5 230 | Quadro FX 1700 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 11.2+12% | 10_0 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R5 230 draws 50W versus the Quadro FX 1700's 189W — a 116.3% difference. The Radeon R5 230 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon R5 230) vs 350W (Quadro FX 1700). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 168mm vs 168mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots.
| Feature | Radeon R5 230 | Quadro FX 1700 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W-74% | 189W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 168mm | 168mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Perf/Watt | 4.4+300% | 1.1 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R5 230 launched at $50 MSRP and currently averages $25, while the Quadro FX 1700 launched at $699 and now averages $500. The Radeon R5 230 costs 95% less ($475 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 8.9 (Radeon R5 230) vs 0.4 (Quadro FX 1700) — the Radeon R5 230 offers 2125% better value. The Radeon R5 230 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2008).
| Feature | Radeon R5 230 | Quadro FX 1700 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $50-93% | $699 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $25-95% | $500 |
| Performance per Dollar | 8.9+2125% | 0.4 |
| Codename | Weston | GT200B |
| Release | April 18 2017 | November 11 2008 |
| Ranking | #873 | #815 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon R5 230 and Quadro FX 1700
