GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M and NVIDIA GeForce 820A are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions from NVIDIA, but they represent fundamentally different design philosophies and performance tiers. The data shows a clear, albeit narrow, victory for the GT 730M in raw compute benchmarks, yet the 820A offers a significantly more power-efficient package. This analysis breaks down the architectural, benchmark, and specification differences to determine which GPU is better suited for specific workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M is faster, scoring 3107 points compared to the NVIDIA GeForce 820A's 2983 points. This represents a 4.2% performance advantage for the GT 730M.

Q: How does the GeForce GT 730M's performance compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GT 730M has an average benchmark score of 3316, placing it in the 20th percentile of all GPUs. It is 0.5% behind the Intel HD Graphics 530 (3332), 0.9% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 920M (3287), 2.2% behind the Intel HD Graphics P4600 (3389), and 3.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 640 (3210).

Q: What is the performance context for the GeForce 820A relative to its rivals?

A: The 820A's average benchmark score is 2983, placing it in the 19th percentile of all GPUs. Data shows it is 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M (2967), 1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti (2953), 2.1% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro P600 (2923), and 2.4% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB (2913).

Q: Do both GPUs support the same modern graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. However, the GT 730M also supports Vulkan 1.2.175, while the 820A has no Vulkan support listed, which is a notable difference for compatibility with modern cross-platform titles.

Q: What is the difference in power consumption between the two?

A: The GeForce GT 730M has a TDP of 33 W, while the GeForce 820A has a TDP of 15 W. This makes the 820A a much more power-efficient part, drawing less than half the power of the GT 730M.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel and texture fill rate?

A: The GeForce GT 730M is significantly faster in both metrics. It achieves a pixel rate of 5.800 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 23.20 GTexel/s, whereas the 820A achieves only 2.500 GPixel/s and 10.00 GTexel/s, respectively.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on entirely different architectures, which explains their performance and feature disparities. The GeForce GT 730M is based on the GK107 chip using the Kepler architecture, while the GeForce 820A is based on the GF117 chip using the older Fermi 2.0 architecture. Both are fabricated by TSMC on the same 28 nm process node, but the similarities end there.

The Kepler-based GT 730M is a substantially larger and more complex chip. It contains 1,270 million transistors on a die size of 118 mm², yielding a transistor density of 10.8M / mm². In contrast, the Fermi 2.0-based 820A has only 585 million transistors on a 116 mm² die, resulting in a much lower density of 5.0M / mm². This difference in transistor count directly translates to a significant gap in processing resources.

The core configuration highlights this disparity. The GT 730M is equipped with 384 shading units, 32 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 render output units (ROPs). The 820A is far more modest, with only 96 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. This means the GT 730M has four times the shading units and double the ROPs and TMUs, giving it a massive theoretical advantage in compute and fill-rate-bound tasks.

Architecturally, Kepler was a major step forward from Fermi, offering better performance per watt and per clock. The 820A's Fermi 2.0 architecture is a mature but older design. The only modern feature where the 820A matches the GT 730M is in API support, as both list DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. However, the GT 730M pulls ahead with Vulkan 1.2.175 support, which the 820A lacks. The 820A also uses a PCIe 2.0 x16 interface, while the GT 730M uses the newer PCIe 3.0 x16 standard.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, which measures general-purpose compute performance. In this test, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M scores 3107, while the NVIDIA GeForce 820A scores 2983. The GT 730M wins this head-to-head matchup with a delta of 4.2%.

While a 4.2% lead is not overwhelming, it is consistent with the architectural advantages of the GT 730M. The GT 730M's 384 shading units versus the 820A's 96 is a 4x difference in raw shader count, and its FP32 performance of 556.8 GFLOPS is more than double the 820A's 240.0 GFLOPS. The benchmark result suggests that the 820A's lower clock speeds and smaller memory bus (64-bit vs 128-bit) prevent it from translating its resources into a competitive score, though the 4.2% gap is far smaller than the raw specification differences would imply.

The GT 730M also holds a clear advantage in fill rates. Its pixel rate of 5.800 GPixel/s is more than double the 820A's 2.500 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 23.20 GTexel/s is similarly more than double the 820A's 10.00 GTexel/s. These metrics indicate that the GT 730M would be significantly better at handling high-resolution textures and complex pixel shading workloads. The GT 730M also has double the memory bandwidth at 28.80 GB/s compared to the 820A's 16.02 GB/s, which is crucial for feeding the GPU's faster processing units.

Specification Differences

The following table details the key differences between the two GPUs, highlighting areas where the GT 730M is superior and where the 820A holds an advantage.

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M | NVIDIA GeForce 820A |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Architecture | Kepler | Fermi 2.0 |

| Chip | GK107 | GF117 |

| Transistors | 1,270 million | 585 million |

| Die Size | 118 mm² | 116 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 10.8M / mm² | 5.0M / mm² |

| Shading Units | 384 | 96 |

| TMUs | 32 | 16 |

| ROPs | 16 | 8 |

| FP32 Performance | 556.8 GFLOPS | 240.0 GFLOPS |

| Pixel Rate | 5.800 GPixel/s | 2.500 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 23.20 GTexel/s | 10.00 GTexel/s |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 28.80 GB/s | 16.02 GB/s |

| TDP | 33 W | 15 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | IGP |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |

| Vulkan API Support | 1.2.175 | None |

| Release Date | 2013-01-19 | 2014-03-16 |

The GT 730M is the clear winner in nearly every performance-related specification, offering double the memory, quadruple the shading units, and more than double the memory bandwidth. The only significant advantage for the 820A is its power consumption, with a 15 W TDP compared to the GT 730M's 33 W. This makes the 820A a more suitable choice for thin-and-light or fanless designs where thermal and power budgets are extremely tight.

The Verdict

The benchmark data and specifications paint a clear picture of two GPUs with different intended purposes. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M is the superior performer, winning the only head-to-head benchmark with a 4.2% lead and offering more than double the FP32 compute power, pixel fill rate, and memory bandwidth. Its 2 GB of VRAM and 128-bit memory interface provide a more substantial buffer for modern applications and higher-resolution textures. Users who prioritize raw graphics performance and compute capability in an older laptop should choose the GT 730M, as it delivers a meaningful, if not massive, performance advantage.

The NVIDIA GeForce 820A, despite being a later release, is a significantly less capable GPU. However, its 15 W TDP is its primary selling point. For a system where battery life and thermal output are paramount, and where the workload is limited to basic 2D acceleration, video playback, and light productivity, the 820A's power efficiency is a compelling reason for its inclusion. It sacrifices performance to fit into a much smaller power envelope, making it the better choice for ultra-portable or passively cooled systems where the 33 W TDP of the GT 730M would be prohibitive.

In summary, the data shows that the GT 730M is the better GPU for any performance-sensitive task, while the 820A is the better choice for power-constrained environments. The 4.2% benchmark delta, while real, is not a chasm; the decision ultimately hinges on whether the user needs the GT 730M's extra throughput or the 820A's drastically lower power draw.