Home GPU Comparison NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Passive vs NVIDIA Quadro FX 1700M

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Passive vs NVIDIA Quadro FX 1700M

We compared two Professional market GPUs: 48GB VRAM Quadro RTX 8000 Passive and 512MB VRAM Quadro FX 1700M to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.

Main Differences

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Passive 's Advantages
Released 9 years and 10 months late
Boost Clock1620MHz
More VRAM (48GB vs 512GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (672.0GB/s vs 25.60GB/s)
4576 additional rendering cores
NVIDIA Quadro FX 1700M 's Advantages
Lower TDP (50W vs 260W)

Score

Benchmark

FP32 (float)
Quadro RTX 8000 Passive +14980%
14.93 TFLOPS
Quadro FX 1700M
0.099 TFLOPS
VS

Graphics Card

Aug 2018
Release Date
Oct 2008
Quadro
Generation
Quadro FX Mobile
Professional
Type
Professional
PCIe 3.0 x16
Bus Interface
MXM-II

Clock Speeds

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

Memory

48GB
Memory Size
512MB
GDDR6
Memory Type
GDDR3
384bit
Memory Bus
128bit
672.0GB/s
Bandwidth
25.60GB/s

Render Config

-
-
-
72
SM Count
4
4608
Shading Units
32
288
TMUs
16
96
ROPs
8
576
Tensor Cores
-
72
RT Cores
-
64 KB (per SM)
L1 Cache
-
6 MB
L2 Cache
32 KB
-
-
-

Theoretical Performance

155.5 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
5.000 GPixel/s
466.6 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
10.00 GTexel/s
29.86 TFLOPS
FP16 (half)
-
14.93 TFLOPS
FP32 (float)
99.20 GFLOPS
466.6 GFLOPS
FP64 (double)
-

Board Design

260W
TDP
50W
600 W
Suggested PSU
-
No outputs
Outputs
No outputs
1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
Power Connectors
-

Graphics Processor

TU102
GPU Name
G96
TU102-875-A1
GPU Variant
NB9P-GLM
Turing
Architecture
Tesla
TSMC
Foundry
UMC
12 nm
Process Size
65 nm
18.6 billion
Transistors
0.314 billion
754 mm²
Die Size
144 mm²

Graphics Features

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

Related GPU Comparisons

Related News

© 2024 - TopCPU.net   Contact Us Privacy Policy