Home GPU Comparison NVIDIA Quadro FX 3700 vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Passive

NVIDIA Quadro FX 3700 vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Passive

We compared two Professional market GPUs: 512MB VRAM Quadro FX 3700 and 48GB VRAM Quadro RTX 8000 Passive to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.

Main Differences

NVIDIA Quadro FX 3700 's Advantages
Lower TDP (78W vs 260W)
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Passive 's Advantages
Released 10 years and 7 months late
Boost Clock1620MHz
More VRAM (48GB vs 512GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (672.0GB/s vs 51.20GB/s)
4496 additional rendering cores

Score

Benchmark

FP32 (float)
Quadro FX 3700
0.28 TFLOPS
Quadro RTX 8000 Passive +5232%
14.93 TFLOPS
VS

Graphics Card

Jan 2008
Release Date
Aug 2018
Quadro FX
Generation
Quadro
Professional
Type
Professional
PCIe 2.0 x16
Bus Interface
PCIe 3.0 x16

Clock Speeds

-
Base Clock
1230 MHz
-
Boost Clock
1620 MHz
800 MHz
Memory Clock
1750 MHz

Memory

512MB
Memory Size
48GB
GDDR3
Memory Type
GDDR6
256bit
Memory Bus
384bit
51.20GB/s
Bandwidth
672.0GB/s

Render Config

-
-
-
14
SM Count
72
112
Shading Units
4608
56
TMUs
288
16
ROPs
96
-
Tensor Cores
576
-
RT Cores
72
-
L1 Cache
64 KB (per SM)
64 KB
L2 Cache
6 MB
-
-
-

Theoretical Performance

8.000 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
155.5 GPixel/s
28.00 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
466.6 GTexel/s
-
FP16 (half)
29.86 TFLOPS
280.0 GFLOPS
FP32 (float)
14.93 TFLOPS
-
FP64 (double)
466.6 GFLOPS

Board Design

78W
TDP
260W
250 W
Suggested PSU
600 W
2x DVI 1x S-Video
Outputs
No outputs
1x 6-pin
Power Connectors
1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

Graphics Processor

G92
GPU Name
TU102
G92-875-A2
GPU Variant
TU102-875-A1
Tesla
Architecture
Turing
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
65 nm
Process Size
12 nm
0.754 billion
Transistors
18.6 billion
324 mm²
Die Size
754 mm²

Graphics Features

11.1 (10_0)
DirectX
12 Ultimate (12_2)
3.3
OpenGL
4.6
1.1
OpenCL
3.0
N/A
Vulkan
1.3
1.1
CUDA
7.5
4.0
Shader Model
6.6

Related GPU Comparisons

Related News

© 2024 - TopCPU.net   Contact Us Privacy Policy