NVIDIA GeForce 405 OEM vs NVIDIA Quadro FX 1700
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce 405 OEM and NVIDIA Quadro FX 1700 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 405 OEM
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 11 month(s) later
- Around 28% higher core clock speed: 589 MHz vs 460 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 40 nm vs 80 nm
- Around 68% lower typical power consumption: 25 Watt vs 42 Watt
- Around 98% higher memory clock speed: 1580 MHz vs 800 MHz
- Around 67% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 55 vs 33
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 3 September 2010 vs 12 September 2007 |
| Core clock speed | 589 MHz vs 460 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm vs 80 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 25 Watt vs 42 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 1580 MHz vs 800 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 55 vs 33 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro FX 1700
- Around 56% higher texture fill rate: 7.36 GTexel / s vs 4.71 GTexel / s
- 2x more pipelines: 32 vs 16
- Around 31% better floating-point performance: 58.88 gflops vs 44.86 gflops
- Around 76% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 208 vs 118
- Around 23% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 1252 vs 1017
- Around 23% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 1252 vs 1017
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Texture fill rate | 7.36 GTexel / s vs 4.71 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 32 vs 16 |
| Floating-point performance | 58.88 gflops vs 44.86 gflops |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 208 vs 118 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1252 vs 1017 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1252 vs 1017 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 405 OEM
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro FX 1700
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce 405 OEM | NVIDIA Quadro FX 1700 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 55 | 33 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 118 | 208 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 2795 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1017 | 1252 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1017 | 1252 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce 405 OEM | NVIDIA Quadro FX 1700 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | Tesla |
| Code name | GT218 | G84 |
| Launch date | 3 September 2010 | 12 September 2007 |
| Place in performance rating | 1637 | 1639 |
| Type | Desktop | Workstation |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $699 | |
| Price now | $89.99 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 2.77 | |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 589 MHz | 460 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 44.86 gflops | 58.88 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 80 nm |
| Pipelines | 16 | 32 |
| Texture fill rate | 4.71 GTexel / s | 7.36 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 25 Watt | 42 Watt |
| Transistor count | 260 million | 289 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Length | 168 mm | 168 mm |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 10.1 | 10.0 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 3.3 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 512 MB |
| Memory bandwidth | 12.64 GB / s | 25.6 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1580 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Memory type | DDR3 | DDR2 |

