NVIDIA GeForce GT 545 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 545 represent two distinct generations of NVIDIA mobile and desktop graphics, respectively. The benchmark data shows the GT 740M holds a clear performance lead, scoring 3974 in Geekbench OpenCL against the GT 545’s 3594, a 10.6% advantage. The GT 740M also ranks slightly higher overall, sitting at the 22nd percentile of all GPUs compared to the GT 545’s 21st percentile. This data suggests that despite being a mobile part, the newer Kepler architecture of the GT 740M delivers superior compute performance in this specific test.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the provided benchmark data, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M is the stronger performer. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 3974 is 10.6% higher than the GT 545’s 3594, making it the definitive winner in the single head-to-head benchmark available. The GT 740M also has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 3717 compared to the GT 545’s 3594, reinforcing its overall performance edge. For users prioritizing raw compute throughput in OpenCL workloads, the data clearly points to the GT 740M.

The GT 545, while older and slower in this test, is not without its own merits. Its nearest rivals in the benchmark database include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050, from which it trails by only 1%, and the AMD Radeon HD 6770, from which it trails by 1.5%. This indicates that the GT 545 still holds its own against a range of other GPUs, even if it loses to the GT 740M. However, with no benchmark wins of its own (winsB: 0), the data cannot justify selecting it over the GT 740M based on performance alone.

The choice is straightforward from the data: the GT 740M offers a measurable performance advantage in the tested workload. The GT 545’s only unique advantage lies in its specification sheet, such as a wider memory bus and lower transistor density, but these do not translate into a benchmark victory. The GT 740M is the recommended pick for any application where the Geekbench OpenCL score is a relevant indicator of performance. The GT 545 remains a viable option only if the specific hardware characteristics of a desktop card with its particular display outputs are required, as the data shows no performance reason to choose it.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and process nodes. The GT 740M uses the GK208 chip based on the Kepler 2.0 architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. In contrast, the GT 545 uses the GF116 chip based on the much older Fermi 2.0 architecture, also from TSMC but on a larger 40 nm process. This process difference is significant: the GT 740M packs 1,020 million transistors into a die size of just 87 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 11.7M / mm². The GT 545, meanwhile, has more transistors overall at 1,170 million, but they are spread across a much larger 238 mm² die, yielding a far lower density of 4.9M / mm².

The architectural shift is also apparent in the core configuration. The GT 740M features 384 shading units, 32 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 8 render output units (ROPs). The GT 545, despite having a larger die, offers only 144 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This means the GT 740M has more than 2.6 times the shading units of the GT 545, which directly contributes to its higher compute throughput. The GT 545’s advantage lies in its ROP count, which is double that of the GT 740M, and its memory bus width, which is 192-bit versus the GT 740M’s 64-bit.

Clock speeds also differ, though the GT 545 has no listed base or boost clock. The GT 740M runs at a base clock of 980 MHz with a boost up to 1033 MHz. The memory clocks are similar, with the GT 740M running at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) and the GT 545 at 800 MHz (1600 Mbps effective). The GT 740M’s architectural efficiency is reflected in its pixel rate of 8.264 GPixel/s and texture rate of 33.06 GTexel/s, both significantly higher than the GT 545’s 4.320 GPixel/s and 17.28 GTexel/s. The GT 740M also delivers 793.3 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, nearly double the GT 545’s 414.7 GFLOPS.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score of 3974, compared to the NVIDIA GeForce GT 545’s score of 3594, giving the GT 740M a 10.6% lead.

Q: What is the difference in their manufacturing process?

A: The GT 740M is built on a 28 nm process, while the GT 545 uses a larger 40 nm process. This results in the GT 740M having a much higher transistor density of 11.7M / mm² versus the GT 545’s 4.9M / mm².

Q: How do their memory subsystems compare?

A: The GT 740M has 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The GT 545 has 1536 MB of DDR3 memory on a wider 192-bit bus, providing significantly more bandwidth at 38.40 GB/s.

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The GT 740M has a TDP of 33 W, while the GT 545 has a TDP of 70 W. The GT 545 also has a suggested PSU of 250 W, whereas the GT 740M has no suggested PSU listed.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. However, the GT 740M supports Vulkan 1.2.175, while the GT 545 has no Vulkan support listed.

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The GT 740M has an average benchmark score of 3717, which is higher than the GT 545’s average score of 3594. The GT 740M also ranks in the 22nd percentile of all GPUs, compared to the GT 545’s 21st percentile.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets for the two GPUs reveal several key differences beyond performance. The GT 740M is a mobile part using an MXM Module slot width, while the GT 545 is a desktop card with a Single-slot design. The GT 545 has a physical length of 145 mm (5.7 inches), while the GT 740M has no listed dimensions.

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M | NVIDIA GeForce GT 545 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Kepler 2.0 | Fermi 2.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 40 nm |

| Transistors | 1,020 million | 1,170 million |

| Die Size | 87 mm² | 238 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 11.7M / mm² | 4.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 980 MHz | None |

| Boost Clock | 1033 MHz | None |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 1536 MB |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 14.40 GB/s | 38.40 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 384 | 144 |

| TMUs | 32 | 24 |

| ROPs | 8 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 8.264 GPixel/s | 4.320 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 33.06 GTexel/s | 17.28 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 793.3 GFLOPS | 414.7 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 33 W | 70 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Single-slot |

| Suggested PSU | None | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.3a, 1x VGA |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.175 | None |

| Release Date | 2013-06-19 | 2011-05-13 |

| Predecessor | GeForce 600M | GeForce 400 |

| Successor | GeForce 800M | GeForce 600 |

| Launch MSRP | None | 149 USD |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are unambiguous. The GT 740M scores 3974, while the GT 545 scores 3594. This gives the GT 740M a 10.6% lead in this workload, marking it as the clear winner in compute performance. The deltaPct of 10.6% indicates a substantial gap, not a marginal one. This single result is the sole basis for the wins tally, with the GT 740M taking 1 win and the GT 545 taking 0.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the GT 740M’s average benchmark score of 3717 is also higher than the GT 545’s 3594. This 123-point difference reinforces the head-to-head result, showing that the GT 740M’s advantage is not isolated to a single test. The GT 740M also has a second benchmark score in Geekbench Vulkan of 3459, which the GT 545 lacks entirely, further diversifying the GT 740M’s performance profile. The GT 545’s single benchmark score of 3594 places it in the 21st percentile of all GPUs, just one percentile point below the GT 740M’s 22nd percentile ranking.

The nearest rival data adds another layer of interpretation. The GT 740M’s closest competitor is the NVIDIA Quadro 3000M, with a deltaPct of 0, meaning they are effectively tied. The GT 545’s closest rival is the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation, from which it trails by only 0.1%. This suggests that while the GT 545 is older, its performance level is still within a narrow band of some much newer parts, though it cannot match the GT 740M. The data consistently shows the GT 740M as the superior choice in compute-oriented tasks.

Where Each One Wins

The GT 740M wins decisively in raw compute performance. Its 10.6% higher Geekbench OpenCL score and its higher average benchmark score of 3717 versus 3594 make it the stronger choice for any workload that relies on general-purpose GPU computing. Its higher shading unit count of 384 and FP32 performance of 793.3 GFLOPS support this, indicating a clear advantage in parallel processing tasks. The GT 740M also wins on energy efficiency, with a TDP of 33 W compared to the GT 545’s 70 W, meaning it achieves more performance while consuming less power. Furthermore, the GT 740M’s support for Vulkan 1.2.175 gives it a feature advantage in modern graphics APIs, a capability the GT 545 lacks entirely.

The GT 545, despite losing the benchmark, has specific specification-based wins. Its memory bandwidth is substantially higher at 38.40 GB/s versus the GT 740M’s 14.40 GB/s, due to its wider 192-bit memory bus. This could theoretically benefit memory-intensive operations, though the benchmark data does not show this translating into a win. The GT 545 also has double the ROPs of the GT 740M (16 versus 8), which may help in fill-rate-bound scenarios, though its pixel rate of 4.320 GPixel/s is actually lower than the GT 740M’s 8.264 GPixel/s. The GT 545 also offers a fixed set of display outputs (1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.3a, 1x VGA), making it a more versatile desktop card for direct display connections, whereas the GT 740M’s outputs are dependent on the portable device it is installed in.

In practical terms, the data suggests the GT 740M is the better choice for compute and efficiency-focused users, while the GT 545 might appeal to those who specifically need its desktop form factor, wider memory bus, or dedicated display outputs. The GT 545’s only listed launch MSRP of 149 USD provides a historical reference point, but no current pricing data is available to compare value. Ultimately, the benchmark results leave no doubt: the GT 740M is the superior performer, and the GT 545’s advantages are confined to its specification sheet rather than measurable performance outcomes.