NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Comparison

NVIDIA’s Kepler architecture powers both the GeForce GT 730M and the GeForce GTX 650, but the two parts are engineered for different segments of the market. The GT 730M is a mobile-first MXM module with a 33 W TDP, while the GTX 650 is a single-slot desktop card drawing 65 W. Benchmark data from Geekbench shows a clear performance hierarchy, but the gap between them is not uniform across all workloads. The GTX 650 wins both head-to-head tests, yet the GT 730M remains competitive in specific API scenarios relative to its own class of rivals.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 650 is the outright winner in raw compute performance. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, it scores 4545 against the GT 730M’s 3107, a margin of 31.6%. In the Vulkan test, the GTX 650 scores 4524 versus 3524, a 22.1% advantage. These are the only two direct comparisons available, and the GTX 650 wins both. Its average benchmark score of 3823 places it in the 22nd percentile of all GPUs, while the GT 730M’s average of 3316 lands in the 20th percentile. The data suggests the GTX 650 is the stronger choice for any compute-heavy or graphics-accelerated task that scales with raw throughput.

The GT 730M, however, finds its niche in mobile platforms where power and space constraints matter. Its 33 W TDP is roughly half that of the GTX 650’s 65 W, and it requires no auxiliary power connectors, whereas the GTX 650 needs a single 6-pin connector. In the Vulkan test, the GT 730M’s score of 3524 is closer to the GTX 650’s 4524 than the OpenCL gap would suggest, indicating that the mobile part handles modern API overhead relatively well. Its nearest rivals include the Intel HD Graphics 530 (deltaPct -0.5%) and the NVIDIA GeForce 920M (deltaPct 0.9%), meaning it trades blows with integrated and entry-level discrete solutions. For a laptop GPU, the GT 730M is positioned to deliver consistent, if modest, performance within a tight power envelope.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs use the Kepler architecture, fabricated on TSMC’s 28 nm process. The GT 730M uses the GK107 chip, while the GTX 650 uses the larger GK106 die. Transistor counts differ substantially: the GK107 packs 1,270 million transistors on a 118 mm² die, while the GK106 contains 2,540 million transistors on a 221 mm² die. Transistor density is similar (10.8M / mm² for the GT 730M versus 11.5M / mm² for the GTX 650), indicating a comparable design rule, but the GTX 650 has nearly double the silicon area to work with.

Shader resources are identical on paper: both have 384 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. The difference lies in clock speeds and memory configuration. The GT 730M runs at a fixed 725 MHz base and boost, delivering 556.8 GFLOPS of FP32 compute. The GTX 650’s clock figures are not listed in the data, but its pixel rate of 8.464 GPixel/s and texture rate of 33.86 GTexel/s are significantly higher than the GT 730M’s 5.800 GPixel/s and 23.20 GTexel/s. This translates to 812.5 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, a 46% advantage over the mobile part.

Memory is a major differentiator. The GT 730M uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 650 uses 1 GB of GDDR5 on the same 128-bit bus, but its bandwidth reaches 80.00 GB/s — nearly three times higher. Memory clock speeds reflect this: the GT 730M runs at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), while the GTX 650 runs at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The GTX 650 also supports a wider set of display outputs (1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2), whereas the GT 730M’s outputs are listed as portable-device dependent.

Both cards support DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The GT 730M is part of the GeForce 700M generation, released January 2013, while the GTX 650 belongs to the GeForce 600 series, released November 2013. The GT 730M follows the GeForce 600M line and precedes the GeForce 800M; the GTX 650 follows GeForce 500 and precedes GeForce 700. Both are end-of-life products.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test shows the GTX 650 with a decisive 31.6% lead. Scores are 4545 for the GTX 650 versus 3107 for the GT 730M. This is the largest delta between the two cards in any test, and it aligns with the GTX 650’s higher pixel and texture rates. OpenCL workloads often saturate memory bandwidth, and the GTX 650’s 80.00 GB/s versus 28.80 GB/s gives it a structural advantage that clock-for-clock shader parity cannot overcome.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap narrows to 22.1%. The GTX 650 scores 4524, while the GT 730M posts 3524. Vulkan’s lower overhead and more explicit control can benefit architectures with smaller caches or less aggressive memory compression, which may explain why the GT 730M closes some of the distance. Still, the GTX 650 maintains a comfortable lead, and its Vulkan score of 4524 is nearly identical to its OpenCL score of 4545, suggesting consistent performance across API types. The GT 730M’s Vulkan score of 3524 is notably higher than its OpenCL score of 3107, indicating that the mobile part handles Vulkan’s threading model more efficiently than OpenCL’s.

The GTX 650’s average benchmark score of 3823 places it 15.3% above the GT 730M’s 3316. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce MX110 (deltaPct -0.3%) and the Intel UHD Graphics 710 (deltaPct 0.8%), meaning it sits in a tight cluster of entry-level discrete and modern integrated parts. The GT 730M’s nearest rivals are the Intel HD Graphics 530 (deltaPct -0.5%) and the NVIDIA GeForce 920M (deltaPct 0.9%), showing that it competes at a lower performance tier. The percentile ranks reinforce this: 22nd for the GTX 650 versus 20th for the GT 730M, a modest but real separation in the overall GPU landscape.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The GTX 650. Its FP32 throughput is 812.5 GFLOPS, compared to the GT 730M’s 556.8 GFLOPS. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 650 scores 4545 versus 3107, a 31.6% advantage.

Q: Why is the GTX 650 faster despite having the same number of shaders?

A: Both have 384 shading units, but the GTX 650’s higher pixel rate (8.464 GPixel/s versus 5.800 GPixel/s) and texture rate (33.86 GTexel/s versus 23.20 GTexel/s) indicate higher clock speeds. The GTX 650 also uses GDDR5 memory with 80.00 GB/s bandwidth, versus the GT 730M’s DDR3 at 28.80 GB/s.

Q: Does the GT 730M have any advantage in the benchmark data?

A: It has a lower TDP (33 W versus 65 W) and requires no power connectors. In Vulkan, its score of 3524 is closer to the GTX 650’s 4524 than in OpenCL, suggesting it manages modern API workloads relatively well for its class.

Q: How do these cards compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The GTX 650’s average score of 3823 is nearly tied with the NVIDIA GeForce MX110 (deltaPct -0.3%) and slightly above the Intel UHD Graphics 710 (deltaPct 0.8%). The GT 730M’s average of 3316 is within 1% of the Intel HD Graphics 530 and NVIDIA GeForce 920M.

Q: Which card has more memory?

A: The GT 730M has 2 GB of DDR3, while the GTX 650 has 1 GB of GDDR5. However, the GTX 650’s memory bandwidth is 80.00 GB/s versus 28.80 GB/s, making it substantially faster despite the lower capacity.

Q: Are both cards from the same architecture generation?

A: Yes, both use Kepler architecture on TSMC’s 28 nm process. The GT 730M uses the GK107 chip with 1,270 million transistors, while the GTX 650 uses the GK106 chip with 2,540 million transistors.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for performance: the GTX 650. It beats the GT 730M by 31.6% in OpenCL and 22.1% in Vulkan, and its average benchmark score of 3823 is 15.3% higher. Its GDDR5 memory and higher pixel/texture rates make it the superior choice for any task that benefits from memory bandwidth or fill rate. Users building a desktop system with access to a 6-pin power connector and a 250 W PSU should pick the GTX 650 without hesitation.

The GT 730M, however, is not without a purpose. Its 33 W TDP and MXM form factor make it suitable for laptops where power draw and thermal output are the primary constraints. Its Vulkan score of 3524 shows that it can handle modern APIs with reasonable efficiency, and its 2 GB memory capacity may be advantageous for workloads that need more framebuffer space rather than raw bandwidth. For mobile users who need a discrete GPU without the power overhead of a desktop part, the GT 730M is the appropriate choice.

Neither card is competitive in the current GPU landscape — both sit in the 20th and 22nd percentiles, respectively, and both are end-of-life products. But within this head-to-head, the GTX 650 is the faster, more capable card. The GT 730M trades performance for mobility, and the benchmark data reflects that trade-off precisely.