OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

ZOTAC GeForce GT 710 Low Profile 2GB review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£60VRAM:2 GBMemory bus width:64 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):19 W

ZOTAC GeForce GT 710 Low Profile 2GB Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 1 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

ZOTAC GeForce GT 710 Low Profile 2GB
4.9/10

Overall score

Score
4.9/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 97% of models
Score components

40%

4.0

Technical score

25%

4.0

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

4.0

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 97% of graphics cards
6.4

Value for money

Value for money
6.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 88% of models
Score components

70%

4.9

Overall score

30%

10

Price

â–¼Worse than 88%
4.0

Technical score

Technical score
4.0/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 93% of models
Score components

44%

3.3

Performance

24%

1.4

Memory

12%

7.8

Power

11%

6.0

Features

5%

8.0

Design

4%

5.0

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 93%
4.0

Reviews score

Reviews score
4.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 94% of models

4.0

Mark 7.3 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.9

Average grade

20%

5.0

Popularity

Grades by review (1)
1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 94%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • zotac-geforce-gt-710-low-profile-2gb
  • zotac-geforce-gt-710-low-profile-2gb
  • zotac-geforce-gt-710-low-profile-2gb
  • zotac-geforce-gt-710-low-profile-2gb
  • zotac-geforce-gt-710-low-profile-2gb
  • zotac-geforce-gt-710-low-profile-2gb
  • zotac-geforce-gt-710-low-profile-2gb
  • zotac-geforce-gt-710-low-profile-2gb
zotac-geforce-gt-710-low-profile-2gb
zotac-geforce-gt-710-low-profile-2gb
zotac-geforce-gt-710-low-profile-2gb
zotac-geforce-gt-710-low-profile-2gb
zotac-geforce-gt-710-low-profile-2gb
zotac-geforce-gt-710-low-profile-2gb
zotac-geforce-gt-710-low-profile-2gb
zotac-geforce-gt-710-low-profile-2gb
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What owners say about the ZOTAC GeForce GT 710 Low Profile 2GB

Based on 212 owners sharing their experience in online comments

69%positive13%mixed18%negative

Owners value its playable game performance, while limited speed makes newer and demanding titles difficult.

What owners dislike

  • Frame rates are too low for modern demanding games and some recent titles, often dropping to 20 to 30 fps or less even at low settings.39
  • Some owners ran into software problems, such as RTX Voice not working on the 1x slot version, shadow artifacts, and DirectX 11 support limits.4
  • The DDR3 version is only slightly faster than Intel integrated graphics like the HD 4600 or UHD 630, and the DDR5 version is about equal to them.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card ZOTAC GeForce GT 710 Low Profile 2GB

Technical score
Technical score
4.0/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 93% of models
Score components:

44%

3.3

Performance

24%

1.4

Memory

12%

7.8

Power

11%

6.0

Features

5%

8.0

Design

4%

5.0

Connectivity

4.0
Reviews score
4.0
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 88% of models
Score components:

70%

4.9

Overall score

30%

10

Price

6.4
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
?
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
Market range: <0 points – >25k points
This graphics card scores 0 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 83.1% of graphics cards and equal to 16.9% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
619 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 619 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 99.7% of graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
360 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 360 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 99.4% of graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
0.37 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 0.37 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 98.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.2% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
2 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >24 GB
This graphics card has 2 GB of VRAM, which is less than 94.3% of graphics cards and equal to 3.9% of graphics cards.
Memory type
?
Memory bus width
64 bit
Market range: <64 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 64 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 96.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 3.3% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
12.8 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 12.8 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 99.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.3% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
1,600 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 1,600 MHz, which is slower than that of 99% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.5% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
2
This graphics card supports PCIe 2, which is older than on 98.4% of graphics cards and equal to 1.5% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x8
This graphics card uses x8 PCIe lanes, which is fewer than 75.9% of graphics cards and equal to 22.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12
This graphics card supports DirectX 12, which is older than on 81.8% of graphics cards and equal to 17% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.2
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.2, which is older than on 94.9% of graphics cards and equal to 3.9% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
3
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 3 displays, which is fewer than 91% of graphics cards and equal to 6.6% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
4096x2160
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 4096x2160, which is lower than that of 92.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4.6% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
0
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 0 DisplayPort outputs, which is fewer than 96.9% of graphics cards and equal to 3.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.4a
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.4a, which is more advanced than on 19.3% of graphics cards and equal to 46.3% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
?
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
19 W
Market range: <60 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 19 W, which is lower than that of 99.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.3% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
?
Recommended PSU wattage
300 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 300 W PSU, which is lower than that of 94% of graphics cards and equal to that of 5% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
?
PCIe power spec
?
Show more
Size
?
Length
?
Height
?
Slot width
?
Weight
350 g
Market range: <500 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 350 g, which is lighter than 95.6% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of Graphics cards.
Show more

ZOTAC GeForce GT 710 Low Profile 2GB vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 91.2% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (19 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    19 W vs 215 W
  • 53.8% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (300 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    300 W vs 650 W
  • 8.67x cheaper
    ZOTAC GeForce GT 710 Low Profile 2GB is cheaper than the average graphics card (£60 vs £520).
    £60 vs £520
  • 70.4% smaller GPU die
    This graphics card has a lower GPU die size than the average graphics card (87 mm² vs 294 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 294 mm².
    87 mm² vs 294 mm²
  • More FP64 throughput
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:24 vs 1:64).
    1:24 vs 1:64
  • 65.5% lighter
    This graphics card is lighter than the average graphics card (350 g vs 1,014 g). The average graphics card weighs 1,014 g.
    350 g vs 1,014 g
  • 8.67x cheaper
    ZOTAC GeForce GT 710 Low Profile 2GB is cheaper than the average graphics card (£60 vs £520).
    £60 vs £520
  • More FP64 throughput
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:24 vs 1:64).
    1:24 vs 1:64
  • 70.4% smaller GPU die
    This graphics card has a lower GPU die size than the average graphics card (87 mm² vs 294 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 294 mm².
    87 mm² vs 294 mm²
  • 91.2% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (19 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    19 W vs 215 W
  • 53.8% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (300 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    300 W vs 650 W
  • 65.5% lighter
    This graphics card is lighter than the average graphics card (350 g vs 1,014 g). The average graphics card weighs 1,014 g.
    350 g vs 1,014 g
  • 10 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (2 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    2 GB vs 12 GB
  • 44.4% lower review score
    Reviews score
    4.0/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 94% of models

    4.0

    Mark 7.3 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.9

    Average grade

    20%

    5.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (1)
    1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    4.0 vs 7.2
  • 39 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (1 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    1 vs 40
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 5.6x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    28 nm vs 5 nm
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • Less advanced frame generation
    ZOTAC GeForce GT 710 Low Profile 2GB has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 168 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (16 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    16 vs 184
  • 44.4% lower review score
    Reviews score
    4.0/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 94% of models

    4.0

    Mark 7.3 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.9

    Average grade

    20%

    5.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (1)
    1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    4.0 vs 7.2
  • 48.7% lower sentiment score
    4.0 vs 7.8
  • 15.8% worse value for money
    ZOTAC GeForce GT 710 Low Profile 2GB has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.4 vs 7.4).
    6.4 vs 7.41
  • 39 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (1 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    1 vs 40
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 168 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (16 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    16 vs 184
  • 96% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (15.3 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    15.26 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 97.6% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (3.8 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    3.82 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 56 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (8 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    8 vs 64
  • 144 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    0 vs 144
  • 98.4% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (0.4 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    0.37 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 7 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2016 vs 2023).
    2,016 vs 2,023
  • 97.3% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (619 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    619 points vs 22,638 points
  • 97% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (360 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    360 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 95.8% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.02 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 4,160 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (192 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    192 vs 4,352
  • 10 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (2 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    2 GB vs 12 GB
  • 97.1% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (12.8 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    12.8 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 91.6% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (1,600 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    1,600 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 128 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (64 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    64 bit vs 192 bit
  • 8.6% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,600 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,600 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 5.6x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    28 nm vs 5 nm
  • Less advanced frame generation
    ZOTAC GeForce GT 710 Low Profile 2GB has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No ray tracing
    This graphics card does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
  • Fewer PCIe lanes
    This graphics card has fewer PCIe lanes than the average graphics card (x8 vs x16). The average graphics card has x16 PCIe lanes.
    x8 vs x16
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (2 vs 4).
    2.0 vs 4.0
  • No AI upscalers
    This graphics card does not support AI upscalers, the average graphics card does.
  • No XeSS support
    This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No mesh shaders
    This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, the average graphics card does.
  • Older Vulkan version
    This graphics card supports an older Vulkan version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4).
    1.2 vs 1.4
  • No Resizable BAR
    This graphics card does not support Resizable BAR, while the average graphics card does. 76.4% of Graphics cards support it.
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12 vs 12 Ultimate
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.5 vs 6.8).
    6.5 vs 6.8
  • No sampler feedback
    This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
  • 95.5% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (1,020 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    1,020 million vs 22,900 million
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (1.4a vs 2.1a).
    1.4a vs 2.1a
  • 3 fewer DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has fewer DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (0 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    0 vs 3
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • 1 fewer displays supported
    This graphics card supports fewer displays than the average graphics card (3 vs 4). The average graphics card supports 4 displays.
    3 vs 4
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No DSC support
    This graphics card does not support DSC, the average graphics card does.
  • No VRR support
    This graphics card does not support VRR, the average graphics card does.
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (1.4 vs 2.3).
    1.4 vs 2.3
  • Older NVDEC generation
    This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (1 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
    1 vs 6
  • Lower display resolution
    This graphics card supports a lower maximum digital resolution than the average graphics card (4096x2160 vs 7680x4320). The average graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320.
    4096x2160 vs 7680x4320
  • Not VR ready
    This graphics card is not VR ready, while the average graphics card is.
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

7.0
DestructiveBurn
≈ estimated
15/03/2018
Hands-on test · Minecraft, game performance and cooling
Verdict
ZOTAC GeForce GT 710 Low Profile 2GB handles Minecraft on low settings, but it needs a fan to stay cool.
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded

Third-party reviews

What customers like about ZOTAC GeForce GT 710 Low Profile 2GB

  • The low-profile design fits slim cases.
  • A 19 W power draw keeps the power demand very low.
  • At 350 g it is light to handle when fitting it.
  • A 300 W recommended power supply suits a modest PC.
  • CUDA support lets CUDA software run on it.
  • It supports three displays.

What customers don't like about ZOTAC GeForce GT 710 Low Profile 2GB

  • There is no DisplayPort output, which limits the screens you can use.
  • Memory bandwidth of 12.8 GB/s holds it back beyond desktop work.
  • At 0.37 TFLOPS of FP32 performance it leaves little room for games.
  • There is no ray tracing or DLSS, so newer games miss those tools.
  • It runs on a PCIe 2.0 x8 link, which is older and slower.

Verdict

Slim cases and very low power draw are the reason to look at the ZOTAC GeForce GT 710 Low Profile 2GB, a card for basic screens and simple tasks. It draws 19 W under load, recommends a 300 W power supply and weighs 350 g, so it suits an older office desktop. CUDA support and FSR give it some useful software options. The 2 GB of memory sounds generous, but the 12.8 GB/s bandwidth and 0.37 TFLOPS keep it to desktop work and light use. It supports three displays, but has no DisplayPort output. The trade-off is the lack of newer options: there is no ray tracing, no DLSS, no AV1 decode and no Variable Refresh Rate. It suits a buyer who wants a basic screen on a slim PC and does not need games.

Compare ZOTAC GeForce GT 710 Low Profile 2GB with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of ZOTAC GeForce GT 710 Low Profile 2GB and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found