I would go with the ASUS. The GPU is going to be clocked higher.

The Quadro also is not going to have as good of a cooler if I remember correctly.

cyclone3d wrote on 2026-06-23, 01:31:

I would go with the ASUS. The GPU is going to be clocked higher.

The Quadro also is not going to have as good of a cooler if I remember correctly.

The cooler should be okay because I have one of those 3rd party Zalman copper coolers that should do the trick.

But thank you for your comment, I appreciate it.

Hi,

The NVIDIA Quadro series is the workstation oriented version of consumer cards, they generally do offer better build quality than the consumer versions of cards, however back when the ASUS V9570 was made ASUS was still a quite good manufacturer(How things changed...).

The Quadro FX 1100 has a slightly higher memory bandwidth, but if using the official drivers and firmware then Quadro drivers are generally optimized for better output quality than speed, so the performance advantage will be most likely lost there. However whether an FX5700 chip can utilize the 256 MB memory in the ASUS V9570 properly is also a bit questionable, most likely you hit the card performance point before hitting the VRAM limit in most games, although for those games that preload textures into VRAM it can make the gameplay smoother.

For gaming I would choose the ASUS V9570 one, good enough build quality, gaming oriented and not CAD oriented.

Quadro FX 1100 is faster.

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-23, 05:54:

For gaming I would choose the ASUS V9570 one, good enough build quality, gaming oriented and not CAD oriented.

That is irrelevant.

The Quadro FX 1100 is closer to an FX 5700 Ultra, while the Asus is a regular FX 5700. The Quadro has faster ram, better build quality and a better cooler. I have an Quadro FX 1100 in my collection and I was surprised to see that it came with 2.2ns memory despite being clocked at a conservative 325mhz (650 DDR). Since the memory is 2.2ns it's actually rated for 450Mhz (900 DDR), witch means it's running under spec. My card can handle 450mhz no problem because of this, and since the ram is 2.2ns it's not really considered overclocking. Similar story with a couple Quadro FX 500 cards - one comes with 3.6ns samsung chips, while the other comes with 3.2ns elpida, both in tsop II packaging. The latter can do 325 on the core and 650Mhz on the vram, effectively an FX 5200 Ultra. The one with 3.6ns ram can do 550Mhz ram an 340Mhz on the core - still fast for what is basically an FX 5200.

Look at the VRAM on your FX 1100. There's a good chance it's 2.2ns GDDR - if it is, you have yourself an FX 5700 Ultra dressed as a Quadro. It means you can safely raise the memory speed to FX 5700 ultra levels with rivatuner.

Socket3 wrote on 2026-06-23, 10:34:

That is irrelevant. […]
Show full quote

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-23, 05:54:

For gaming I would choose the ASUS V9570 one, good enough build quality, gaming oriented and not CAD oriented.

That is irrelevant.

The Quadro FX 1100 is closer to an FX 5700 Ultra, while the Asus is a regular FX 5700. The Quadro has faster ram, better build quality and a better cooler. I have an Quadro FX 1100 in my collection and I was surprised to see that it came with 2.2ns memory despite being clocked at a conservative 325mhz (650 DDR). Since the memory is 2.2ns it's actually rated for 450Mhz (900 DDR), witch means it's running under spec. My card can handle 450mhz no problem because of this, and since the ram is 2.2ns it's not really considered overclocking. Similar story with a couple Quadro FX 500 cards - one comes with 3.6ns samsung chips, while the other comes with 3.2ns elpida, both in tsop II packaging. The latter can do 325 on the core and 650Mhz on the vram, effectively an FX 5200 Ultra. The one with 3.6ns ram can do 550Mhz ram an 340Mhz on the core - still fast for what is basically an FX 5200.

Look at the VRAM on your FX 1100. There's a good chance it's 2.2ns GDDR - if it is, you have yourself an FX 5700 Ultra dressed as a Quadro. It means you can safely raise the memory speed to FX 5700 ultra levels with rivatuner.

I have given advice regarding the use case that @Pluming has presented, and it was already mentioned:

Pluming wrote on 2026-06-23, 01:38:

The cooler should be okay because I have one of those 3rd party Zalman copper coolers that should do the trick.

So that the cooler will be replaced so the better cooler is irrelevant, I also mentioned in the post(Which you haven't quoted in full so the part you quoted is lacking parts of the context) that my hint should be considered if no OC is given, if he is willing to OC the card and use it with either a modified firmware or drivers then indeed the Quadro FX 1100 is the better one as it does have better performance, however with stock clocks and firmware/drivers it will not give a performance advantage.

There's no need to modify firmware. Quadro cards work absolutely fine for games. Some performance may fluctuate a bit, but not dramatically.

Hi, guys,
And what about VRAM chips frequency and timings? Often the ones used in the video cards with more VRAM from that era are slower chips.

Just a thought...

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2026-06-23, 11:29:

There's no need to modify firmware. Quadro cards work absolutely fine for games. Some performance may fluctuate a bit, but not dramatically.

I have only recommended the ASUS one because I had performance issues with Quadro cards in regards of some games, I would also would recommend a modified driver that handles the card as a FX 5700 instead of the firmware modification, that usually smooths out performance without the risk of a bad firmware update bricking the card. But as I don't have personal experience with that specific Quadro model I'm willing to concede the point.

aVd wrote on 2026-06-23, 11:43:

Hi, guys,
And what about VRAM chips frequency and timings? Often the ones used in the video cards with more VRAM from that era are slower chips.

Just a thought...

That is unfortunately a lot of time true, and it is hard to check, most sites only mention the frequency of the memory on the cards(For example: https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/asus-v9570.b1812), but not the timing characteristic of the VRAM, at least according to that site the ASUS one is at least not under-clocked, but that still doesn't mean that the timing is not worse than the 128Mb version.

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-23, 11:58:

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2026-06-23, 11:29:

There's no need to modify firmware. Quadro cards work absolutely fine for games. Some performance may fluctuate a bit, but not dramatically.

I have only recommended the ASUS one because I had performance issues with Quadro cards in regards of some games, I would also would recommend a modified driver that handles the card as a FX 5700 instead of the firmware modification, that usually smooths out performance without the risk of a bad firmware update bricking the card. But as I don't have personal experience with that specific Quadro model I'm willing to concede the point.

there is literally no difference in performance between a quadro and non-quadro card. Flashing the card to an FX has no performance benefit, but could be a fun experiment. I have experience with using quadro fx 500 (5200 ultra), 1100 (5700 ultra), 3000 (5900 ultra), 3400 (6800) and quadro fx 4000 (6800 agp) cards. They used to be a lot cheaper and easier to find then geforce branded cards, perform the same, have better cooling, and in some cases are conservatively clocked like the aforementioned FX 500 and FX 1100.

At first I'd softmod them into Geforce cards with rivatuner, but as time went on I realised there's no difference in performance so I started running them as Quadro's.

So looking at techpowerup to refresh my memory, the specs are:

1. Quadro fx1100
2. ASUS V9570 GeForce FX 5700 256MB
3. Geforce FX 5700 Ultra

All have the same specs for the GPU (4 Pixel shaders, 3 Vertex shaders, 4TMUs, 4ROPs)

GPU clock:
1. 425
2. 425
3. 475

RAM:
1. DDR2 at 325Mhz (10.4 GB/s)
2. DDR at 250Mhz (8.0GB/s)
3. GDDR2 at 453Mhz (14.5GB/s)

You also need to take into account that each subsequent version of DDR has higher wait states so it takes more clock speed to overcome the additional latency. Throughput is always higher for higher clock speed, but latency can have a huge effect in memory intensive tasks.

I would test out both and see which actually ends up being faster.

Socket3 wrote on 2026-06-23, 14:08:

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-23, 11:58:

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2026-06-23, 11:29:

There's no need to modify firmware. Quadro cards work absolutely fine for games. Some performance may fluctuate a bit, but not dramatically.

I have only recommended the ASUS one because I had performance issues with Quadro cards in regards of some games, I would also would recommend a modified driver that handles the card as a FX 5700 instead of the firmware modification, that usually smooths out performance without the risk of a bad firmware update bricking the card. But as I don't have personal experience with that specific Quadro model I'm willing to concede the point.

there is literally no difference in performance between a quadro and non-quadro card. Flashing the card to an FX has no performance benefit, but could be a fun experiment. I have experience with using quadro fx 500 (5200 ultra), 1100 (5700 ultra), 3000 (5900 ultra), 3400 (6800) and quadro fx 4000 (6800 agp) cards. They used to be a lot cheaper and easier to find then geforce branded cards, perform the same, have better cooling, and in some cases are conservatively clocked like the aforementioned FX 500 and FX 1100.

At first I'd softmod them into Geforce cards with rivatuner, but as time went on I realised there's no difference in performance so I started running them as Quadro's.

I had to use Rivatuner to change the ID of my Quadro FX 4000 because of the water effects in Half-Life 2. I'm sure there were other games that would have been affected. But that was easily done.

Socket3 wrote on 2026-06-23, 14:08:

MagefromAntares wrote on 2026-06-23, 11:58:

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2026-06-23, 11:29:

There's no need to modify firmware. Quadro cards work absolutely fine for games. Some performance may fluctuate a bit, but not dramatically.

I have only recommended the ASUS one because I had performance issues with Quadro cards in regards of some games, I would also would recommend a modified driver that handles the card as a FX 5700 instead of the firmware modification, that usually smooths out performance without the risk of a bad firmware update bricking the card. But as I don't have personal experience with that specific Quadro model I'm willing to concede the point.

there is literally no difference in performance between a quadro and non-quadro card. Flashing the card to an FX has no performance benefit, but could be a fun experiment. I have experience with using quadro fx 500 (5200 ultra), 1100 (5700 ultra), 3000 (5900 ultra), 3400 (6800) and quadro fx 4000 (6800 agp) cards. They used to be a lot cheaper and easier to find then geforce branded cards, perform the same, have better cooling, and in some cases are conservatively clocked like the aforementioned FX 500 and FX 1100.

At first I'd softmod them into Geforce cards with rivatuner, but as time went on I realised there's no difference in performance so I started running them as Quadro's.

As it seems that all benchmarks that compared the normal Geforce FX-es with their Quadro variants have been disappeared from the net. (The only benchmarks I'm able to find are comparing the Quadro to ATI's FireGL, not to NVIDIA's consumer grade cards...) Despite my personal experiences and memories I have to concede the point in regards of performance using the stock drivers/firmware as I currently lack the evidence to support it.

The only thing that I might add is that currently the normal Geforce cards seem to be easier to find than the Quadro variants:
https://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_nkw=Geforc … 4852.m570.l1313 - 70000+ Results
https://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/27386/i.html?_nkw= … uadro&_from=R40 - 14000+ Results
https://www.vatera.hu/information-technology/ … .html?q=Geforce - 363 Results
https://www.vatera.hu/information-technology/ … 2.html?q=Quadro - 35 Results
I have included both ebay UK and a Hungarian site to avoid possible bias by different market conditions in the countries, note that I include the links for reference and not because I wish to promote these sites in any way or form.