NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single available head-to-head benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, decisively favors the younger NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M. The GT 755M scores 4934, against 3740 for the GT 635M, translating to a 31.9% advantage. This is not a marginal lead; it represents a substantial generational leap in raw compute performance. The gap is significant enough that the GT 755M operates in a different performance tier, placing it in closer competition with GPUs like the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB (score 4093) and Intel HD Graphics 630 (score 4075) than with its direct predecessor.

The GT 635M, in its only benchmark result, scores 3740. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro 3000M (score 3718, a 0.6% deficit) and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M (score 3717, likewise a 0.6% deficit). This places the GT 635M in a tight cluster of similarly-performing mobile graphics solutions. Meanwhile, the GT 755M’s nearest rival list includes the AMD FirePro M4150 (score 4013, a 0.5% deficit) and the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 (score 3977, a 1.4% lead for the GT 755M). This data shows the GT 755M is not just faster than the GT 635M; it is competing with a more capable class of hardware, even if only by a narrow margin in some cases.

Looking at the deltaPct values, the GT 755M is 1% ahead of the Intel HD Graphics 630 (score 4075) and 1.5% behind the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB (score 4093). These are close calls, indicating that while the GT 755M is a solid performer for its generation, it is not dominant against all contemporaries. In contrast, the GT 635M’s nearest rival comparisons show it is 1.4% behind the Intel UHD Graphics 710 (score 3792). The clear takeaway is that the GT 755M offers a decisive performance uplift over the GT 635M, a conclusion reinforced by the 31.9% delta in the only direct benchmark test.

The average benchmark score further underscores this divide. The GT 755M averages 4033 across its benchmark results, while the GT 635M averages 3740. This 293-point difference in average score is consistent with the head-to-head result and indicates that the GT 755M’s advantage is not an artifact of a single test. The percentile rankings also reflect the gap: the GT 755M sits at the 24th percentile of all GPUs, while the GT 635M is at the 22nd percentile. While both are below the median, the GT 755M’s higher percentile confirms its superior standing within the broader GPU landscape.

Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm between these two mobile GPUs is vast, explaining the performance gulf. The GT 755M is built on the Kepler architecture, using the GK107 chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. In contrast, the GT 635M uses the older Fermi architecture with the GF108 chip, produced on a 40 nm process, also at TSMC. This process node difference is fundamental: the 28 nm node allows for significantly higher transistor density. The GT 755M packs 1,270 million transistors into a 118 mm² die, yielding a density of 10.8M transistors per mm². The GT 635M, with 585 million transistors on a 116 mm² die, achieves only 5.0M transistors per mm². This more than doubles the transistor density, enabling the GT 755M to house far more compute resources.

The execution resources are dramatically different. The GT 755M features 384 shading units, 32 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 raster output units (ROPs). The GT 635M is far more modest, with only 96 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. This 4x difference in shading units and TMUs, and a 4x difference in ROPs, directly translates to the raw throughput advantage. The pixel rate for the GT 755M is 8.160 GPixel/s, versus 1.900 GPixel/s for the GT 635M. Similarly, the texture rate is 32.64 GTexel/s for the GT 755M, compared to 7.600 GTexel/s for the GT 635M. Floating-point performance (FP32) is 783.4 GFLOPS for the GT 755M, a stark contrast to the 182.4 GFLOPS of the GT 635M. These are not incremental improvements; they are order-of-magnitude differences in compute capability.

Memory architecture also diverges. Both GPUs have a 128-bit memory bus, but the GT 755M uses faster GDDR5 memory running at 1350 MHz (5.4 Gbps effective), while the GT 635M uses DDR3 at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective). This results in a memory bandwidth of 86.40 GB/s for the GT 755M, exactly three times the 28.80 GB/s of the GT 635M. Memory bandwidth is often a bottleneck in mobile GPUs, and this 3x advantage is a major factor in the GT 755M’s superior performance in memory-intensive workloads.

Power and interface specifications also differ. The GT 755M has a TDP of 50 W and uses an MXM Module slot width, while the GT 635M has a lower 35 W TDP and is classified as an IGP (integrated graphics processor). The GT 755M supports PCIe 3.0 x16, whereas the GT 635M is limited to PCIe 2.0 x16. In terms of API support, the GT 755M supports Vulkan 1.2.175, while the GT 635M has no Vulkan support listed. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. These architectural differences—node, transistor count, execution units, memory type, and bus interface—collectively explain why the GT 755M is in a completely different league.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M than the GT 635M in the available benchmark?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GT 755M scores 4934, which is 31.9% higher than the GT 635M’s score of 3740.

Q: What are the key architectural differences between the two GPUs?

A: The GT 755M uses the Kepler architecture (GK107 chip) on a 28 nm process with 1,270 million transistors, while the GT 635M uses the older Fermi architecture (GF108 chip) on a 40 nm process with 585 million transistors. The GT 755M also has 384 shading units compared to 96 on the GT 635M.

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The GT 755M has significantly higher memory bandwidth at 86.40 GB/s, thanks to its GDDR5 memory. The GT 635M with DDR3 memory achieves only 28.80 GB/s.

Q: Does the GT 755M support newer PCIe standards?

A: Yes, the GT 755M supports PCIe 3.0 x16, while the GT 635M is limited to the older PCIe 2.0 x16 interface.

Q: What is the difference in their transistor densities?

A: The GT 755M has a transistor density of 10.8M per mm², more than double the 5.0M per mm² of the GT 635M, despite both having similar die sizes (118 mm² vs 116 mm²).

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The GT 755M has an average benchmark score of 4033, which is higher than the GT 635M’s average score of 3740. This places the GT 755M at the 24th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the 22nd percentile for the GT 635M.

Specification Differences

The following table outlines the key specification differences between the two GPUs, based strictly on the provided data.

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M | NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M |

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

| Architecture | Kepler | Fermi |

| Chip | GK107 | GF108 |

| Generation | GeForce 700M | GeForce 600M |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 40 nm |

| Transistors | 1,270 million | 585 million |

| Die Size | 118 mm² | 116 mm² |

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

| Base Clock | 980 MHz | N/A |

| Boost Clock | 1020 MHz | N/A |

| Memory Clock | 1350 MHz / 5.4 Gbps effective | 900 MHz / 1800 Mbps effective |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 86.40 GB/s | 28.80 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 384 | 96 |

| TMUs | 32 | 16 |

| ROPs | 16 | 4 |

| Pixel Rate | 8.160 GPixel/s | 1.900 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 32.64 GTexel/s | 7.600 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 783.4 GFLOPS | 182.4 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 50 W | 35 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | IGP |

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.175 | None |

| Release Date | 2013-06-24 | 2012-03-21 |

| Predecessor | GeForce 600M | GeForce 500M |

| Successor | GeForce 800M | GeForce 700M |

The Verdict

The data presents a one-sided comparison. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M is unequivocally the superior mobile graphics processor. It wins the only direct head-to-head benchmark by a 31.9% margin, and its architectural specifications are overwhelmingly more advanced. The GT 755M offers 4x the shading units, 4x the ROPs, and over 4x the FP32 compute throughput compared to the GT 635M. Its memory subsystem is three times faster in terms of bandwidth, and it benefits from a newer PCIe generation and support for Vulkan. The GT 635M’s sole advantage is its lower 35 W TDP, which is 15 W less than the GT 755M’s 50 W, potentially offering better battery life in a portable device. However, this comes at a massive cost to performance.

For any user prioritizing graphics performance in a laptop—whether for gaming, 3D rendering, or general GPU-accelerated tasks—the GT 755M is the clear choice. Its percentile ranking (24th vs 22nd) and its proximity to more modern rivals like the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB and Intel HD Graphics 630 highlight its relative strength. The GT 635M, with its Fermi architecture and DDR3 memory, is a legacy part that is outclassed by almost every metric. The benchmark results indicate that the GT 755M is a capable solution for its era, while the GT 635M is best suited for basic, low-demand graphical tasks. If the choice is between these two, the GT 755M is the only rational option based on performance data, assuming the higher power draw is acceptable. The 31.9% performance delta is a decisive factor that outweighs the GT 635M’s lower power consumption for nearly all use cases.