GeForce RTX 4070 vs Quadro FX 2700
GeForce RTX 4070
Popular choices:
Quadro FX 2700
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 GeForce RTX 4070
Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 2700
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce RTX 4070 is significantly newer (2023 vs 2008). The GeForce RTX 4070 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro FX 2700 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce RTX 4070 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 4857.5% higher G3D Mark score and 200% more VRAM (12 GB vs 4 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro FX 2700.
| Insight | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro FX 2700 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+4857.5%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-4857.5%) |
| Longevity | 🏆Elite Architecture (Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) / 5nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | ✨ DLSS 3/4 + Frame Gen Support | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | 🎮 High Capacity (12 GB) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (304mm) | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce RTX 4070 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $550 (vs $50), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 350.7% better value per dollar than the Quadro FX 2700.
| Insight | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro FX 2700 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+350.7%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($550) | ✅More affordable ($50) |
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 GeForce RTX 4070 and Quadro FX 2700
GeForce RTX 4070
The GeForce RTX 4070 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 12 2023. It features the Ada Lovelace architecture. The core clock ranges from 1920 MHz to 2475 MHz. It has 5888 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 200W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 46 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 26,919 points. Launch price was $599.
Quadro FX 2700
The Quadro FX 2700 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: 543 points. Launch price was $3,499.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce RTX 4070 scores 26,919 versus the Quadro FX 2700's 543 — the GeForce RTX 4070 leads by 4857.5%. The GeForce RTX 4070 is built on Ada Lovelace while the Quadro FX 2700 uses Tesla 2.0, both on 5 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 5,888 (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 240 (Quadro FX 2700). Raw compute: 29.15 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 2700).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro FX 2700 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 26,919+4857% | 543 |
| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 5 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 5888+2353% | 240 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 29.15 TFLOPS+4586% | 0.6221 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64+100% | 32 |
| TMUs | 184+130% | 80 |
| L2 Cache | 36 MB+14300% | 0.25 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the GeForce RTX 4070 is support for DLSS 3 Frame Gen. This allows it to generate entire frames using AI/Algorithms, essentially doubling the frame rate in CPU-bound scenarios or heavy ray-tracing titles. The Quadro FX 2700 lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.The GeForce RTX 4070 gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Quadro FX 2700 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro FX 2700 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | DLSS 3.5 | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | DLSS 3.0 (Native) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | Yes (DLSS 3.5) | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce RTX 4070 comes with 12 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro FX 2700 has 4 GB. The GeForce RTX 4070 offers 200% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 192-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 36 MB (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 0.25 MB (Quadro FX 2700) — the GeForce RTX 4070 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro FX 2700 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 12 GB+200% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6X | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 192-bit+200% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 36 MB+14300% | 0.25 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce RTX 4070 draws 200W versus the Quadro FX 2700's 189W — a 5.7% difference. The Quadro FX 2700 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 650W (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 350W (Quadro FX 2700). Power connectors: 8-pin vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro FX 2700 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 200W | 189W-6% |
| Recommended PSU | 650W | 350W-46% |
| Power Connector | 8-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 304mm | — |
| Height | 137mm | — |
| Slots | 3 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 134.6+4541% | 2.9 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce RTX 4070 launched at $599 MSRP and currently averages $550, while the Quadro FX 2700 launched at $100 and now averages $50. The Quadro FX 2700 costs 90.9% less ($500 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 48.9 (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 10.9 (Quadro FX 2700) — the GeForce RTX 4070 offers 348.6% better value. The GeForce RTX 4070 is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2008).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Quadro FX 2700 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $599 | $100-83% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $550 | $50-91% |
| Performance per Dollar | 48.9+349% | 10.9 |
| Codename | AD104 | GT200B |
| Release | April 12 2023 | November 11 2008 |
| Ranking | #32 | #815 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce RTX 4070 and Quadro FX 2700
