Notebookcheck Logo

NVIDIA Quadro FX 370M vs NVIDIA Quadro FX 770M

NVIDIA Quadro FX 370M

► remove from comparison NVIDIA Quadro FX 370M

The NVIDIA Quadro FX 370M is an entry level graphics card for mobile workstations (laptops). It is based on the same core as the Quadro NVS 160M and the GeForce 9200M / 9300M GS. The drivers are optimized for OpenGL applications and professional 3D applications like CAD, DCC, and visualization applications. Furthermore, the drivers are certified to work with the most popular apps without problems.

The gaming performance is a bit below the similar 9200M / 9300M chip because of the professional drivers and therefore the GPU is only capable of displaying low end games fluently. Modern intensive 3D games wont run fluently or only with very low detail settings.

As the 9300M series, the Quadro FX 370M supports PureVideo HD to decode (HD) videos in the GPU.

The performance of the chip also depends on the used graphics memory. Either fast GDDR3 memory (clocked at 700 MHz) or slow GDDR2 (with 400MHz) can be used by the laptop manufacturer.

In the Dell Precision M2400, only GDDR2 graphics memory is used, leading to a slow performance (e.g. Doom3 - ultra 40fps). According to Dell the graphics card needs 20 Watt.

NVIDIA Quadro FX 770M

► remove from comparison NVIDIA Quadro FX 770M

The Quadro FX 770M is a professional midrange graphics adapter for laptops / mobile workstations. The GPU is optimized for professional 2D and 3D applications like CAD, DCC, and visualization software. The FX770M solutions contains certified graphics drivers for the most popular applications.

The GPU chip of the Quadro FX770M is based on the GeForce 9600M GT consumer card for notebooks. Therefore, the Quadro has the same features (like the PureVideo HD video-processor) as the 9600M GT.

The performance of the card should be compareable to the 9600M GT. Still some games may run slower, as the drivers are optimized for applications and OpenGL. Especially the OpenGL performance is way better than with an 9600M GT. The Cinebench R10 OpenGL test shows up to twize the performance with a FX 770M compared to a GeForce 9600M GT.

As all cards of the GeForce 9000M series, the 770M support CUDA.

show full text
NVIDIA Quadro FX 370MNVIDIA Quadro FX 770M
Quadro FX Series
Quadro FX 3800M compare 128 @ 0.68 GHz256 Bit @ 1000 MHz
Quadro FX 3700M compare 128 @ 0.55 GHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 2800M compare 96 @ 0.6 GHz256 Bit @ 1000 MHz
Quadro FX 3600M compare 96 @ 0.5 GHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 1800M compare 72 @ 0.56 GHz128 Bit @ 1100 MHz
Quadro FX 2700M compare 48 @ 0.53 GHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 880M compare 48 @ 0.55 GHz128 Bit @ 790 MHz
Quadro FX 3500M compare 24/8 cores @ 0.58 GHz256 Bit @ 700 MHz
Quadro FX 2500M compare 24/8 cores @ 0.5 GHz256 Bit @ 600 MHz
Quadro FX 1700M compare 32 @ 0.63 GHz128 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 1600M compare 32 @ 0.63 GHz128 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 1500M compare 20/7 cores @ 0.38 GHz256 Bit @ 500 MHz
Quadro FX 770M 32 @ 0.5 GHz128 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 570M compare 32 @ 0.48 GHz128 Bit @ 700 MHz
Quadro FX 380M compare 16 @ 0.63 GHz64 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 370M 8 @ 0.58 GHz64 Bit @ 700 MHz
Quadro FX 360M compare 16 @ 0.4 GHz64 Bit @ 600 MHz
Quadro FX 350M compare 4/3 cores @ 0.45 GHz64 Bit @ 350 MHz
Quadro FX 3800M compare 128 @ 0.68 GHz256 Bit @ 1000 MHz
Quadro FX 3700M compare 128 @ 0.55 GHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 2800M compare 96 @ 0.6 GHz256 Bit @ 1000 MHz
Quadro FX 3600M compare 96 @ 0.5 GHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 1800M compare 72 @ 0.56 GHz128 Bit @ 1100 MHz
Quadro FX 2700M compare 48 @ 0.53 GHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 880M compare 48 @ 0.55 GHz128 Bit @ 790 MHz
Quadro FX 3500M compare 24/8 cores @ 0.58 GHz256 Bit @ 700 MHz
Quadro FX 2500M compare 24/8 cores @ 0.5 GHz256 Bit @ 600 MHz
Quadro FX 1700M compare 32 @ 0.63 GHz128 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 1600M compare 32 @ 0.63 GHz128 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 1500M compare 20/7 cores @ 0.38 GHz256 Bit @ 500 MHz
Quadro FX 770M 32 @ 0.5 GHz128 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 570M compare 32 @ 0.48 GHz128 Bit @ 700 MHz
Quadro FX 380M compare 16 @ 0.63 GHz64 Bit @ 800 MHz
Quadro FX 370M 8 @ 0.58 GHz64 Bit @ 700 MHz
Quadro FX 360M compare 16 @ 0.4 GHz64 Bit @ 600 MHz
Quadro FX 350M compare 4/3 cores @ 0.45 GHz64 Bit @ 350 MHz
CodenameNB9M-GLMNB9P-GLM
Pipelines8 - unified32 - unified
Core Speed580 MHz500 MHz
Shader Speed1450 MHz1250 MHz
Memory Speed700 MHz800 MHz
Memory Bus Width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory TypeGDDR2, GDDR3GDDR2 / GDDR3
Max. Amount of Memory256 MB512 MB
Shared Memorynono
APIDirectX 10, Shader 4.0DirectX 10, Shader 4.0
Power Consumption20 Watt35 Watt
technology65 nm65 nm
Date of Announcement15.08.2008 14.08.2008
InformationOpenGL 2.1, max. 1920x1200 (digital) bzw 2048x1536 (analog), max. 2 unabhängige Displays, PCI-Express x16, optionale Interfaces (des Chips): DP, VGA, DVI, LVDS, HDMI
Link to Manufacturer Pagehttp://www.nvidia.com/object/product_qua...http://www.nvidia.com/object/product_qua...
ArchitectureG9x
Transistors314 Million
Features OpenGL 2.1, PowerMizer 8.0, 12-Bit subpixel precision, 128 Bit graphics pipeline precision
Notebook Sizemedium sized

Benchmarks

3DMark 2001SE - 3DMark 2001 - Standard
13622 Points (14%)
34871 Points (36%)
3DMark 03 - 3DMark 03 - Standard
5532 Points (3%)
17192 Points (9%)
3DMark 05 - 3DMark 05 - Standard
3290 Points (4%)
11161 Points (12%)
3DMark 06 3DMark 06 - Standard 1280x1024 + NVIDIA Quadro FX 370M
3DMark 06
1595 Points (2%)
3DMark 06 - Standard 1280x1024 + NVIDIA Quadro FX 770M
min: 5230     avg: 5297     median: 5296.5 (7%)     max: 5363 Points
SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - 3dsmax
12.3 Points (26%)
33.1 Points (69%)
SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - Catia
16.8 Points (35%)
40.1 Points (84%)
SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - EnSight
12 Points (25%)
31.7 Points (67%)
SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - Maya
27.3 Points (15%)
85.1 Points (46%)
SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - Pro/Engeneer
13.7 Points (27%)
36.1 Points (71%)
SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - SolidWorks
21.8 Points (32%)
55 Points (81%)
SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - UGS Teamcenter
6.8 Points (18%)
19 Points (49%)
SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - UGS NX
5.1 Points (10%)
17.5 Points (36%)
Cinebench R10 Cinebench R10 Shading (32bit) + NVIDIA Quadro FX 370M
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Shading (32bit)
3031 Points (2%)
Cinebench R10 Shading (32bit) + NVIDIA Quadro FX 770M
6180 Points (4%)

Average Benchmarks NVIDIA Quadro FX 370M → 100% n=13

Average Benchmarks NVIDIA Quadro FX 770M → 282% n=13

- Range of benchmark values for this graphics card
- Average benchmark values for this graphics card
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance
1 This benchmark is not used for the average calculation

Game Benchmarks

The following benchmarks stem from our benchmarks of review laptops. The performance depends on the used graphics memory, clock rate, processor, system settings, drivers, and operating systems. So the results don't have to be representative for all laptops with this GPU. For detailed information on the benchmark results, click on the fps number.

Crysis - GPU Benchmark

Crysis - GPU Benchmark

2007
low 1024x768
Quadro FX 770M:
94.2  fps
med. 1024x768
Quadro FX 770M:
39  fps
high 1024x768
Quadro FX 770M:
19.5  fps
Crysis - CPU Benchmark

Crysis - CPU Benchmark

2007
low 1024x768
Quadro FX 770M:
84.7  fps
med. 1024x768
Quadro FX 770M:
35.4  fps
high 1024x768
Quadro FX 770M:
18.1  fps
Doom 3

Doom 3

2004
low 640x480
100%
Quadro FX 370M:
97  fps
170%
Quadro FX 770M:
165.2  fps
med. 640x480
100%
Quadro FX 370M:
97.1  fps
176%
Quadro FX 770M:
171.3  fps
high 800x600
100%
Quadro FX 370M:
65.4  fps
243%
Quadro FX 770M:
158.7  fps
ultra 1024x768
100%
Quadro FX 370M:
39.9  fps
316%
Quadro FX 770M:
126.1  fps

Average Gaming NVIDIA Quadro FX 370M → 100%

Average Gaming 30-70 fps → 100%

Average Gaming NVIDIA Quadro FX 770M → 226%

For more games that might be playable and a list of all games and graphics cards visit our Gaming List

Add one or more devices and compare

In the following list you can select (and also search for) devices that should be added to the comparison. You can select more than one device.

restrict list:

show all (including archived), 2023, 2022
v1.22
log 28. 22:25:18

#0 checking url part for id 1054 +0s ... 0s

#1 checking url part for id 884 +0s ... 0s

#2 not redirecting to Ajax server +0s ... 0s

#3 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Sun, 28 May 2023 11:14:12 +0200 +0.001s ... 0.001s

#4 composed specs +0.082s ... 0.083s

#5 did output specs +0s ... 0.083s

#6 start showIntegratedCPUs +0s ... 0.083s

#7 getting avg benchmarks for device 1054 +0.025s ... 0.108s

#8 got single benchmarks 1054 +0.006s ... 0.114s

#9 getting avg benchmarks for device 884 +0.001s ... 0.115s

#10 got single benchmarks 884 +0.008s ... 0.123s

#11 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.123s

#12 min, max, avg, median took s +0.102s ... 0.225s

#13 before gaming benchmark output +0s ... 0.225s

#14 Got 14 rows for game benchmarks. +0.003s ... 0.228s

#15 composed SQL query for gamebenchmarks +0s ... 0.228s

#16 got data and put it in $dataArray +0.001s ... 0.229s

#17 benchmarks composed for output. +0.007s ... 0.236s

#18 calculated avg scores. +0s ... 0.236s

#19 return log +0.039s ... 0.275s

Please share our article, every link counts!
.170
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Benchmarks / Tech > Graphics Card Comparison - Head 2 Head
Redaktion, 2017-09- 8 (Update: 2017-09-11)