NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M vs NVIDIA Quadro 2000D Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a single direct benchmark comparison between these two GPUs, and it is decisive. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D scores 3930, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M scores 3107. This gives the Quadro 2000D a 26.5% advantage, a substantial margin that reflects a meaningful gap in raw compute throughput.

Context from the nearest rivals reinforces this result. The Quadro 2000D's average benchmark score of 3930 places it within 0.3% of the NVIDIA Quadro K2000D (3919) and 0.6% behind the GeForce GT 745M (3953). It also edges out the AMD Radeon R5 M420 (3956) by 0.7% and the GeForce 830M (3957) by the same margin. These are tight groupings, meaning the Quadro 2000D sits comfortably in a cluster of mid-range GPUs from its era, with no single rival dominating it.

The GT 730M, by contrast, sits in a lower performance tier. Its average score of 3316 places it 0.5% behind the Intel HD Graphics 530 (3332) and 2.2% behind the Intel HD Graphics P4600 (3389). It does manage to beat the NVIDIA GeForce 920M (3287) by 0.9% and the GeForce GT 640 (3210) by 3.3%, but these are modest wins against older or lower-end parts. The 26.5% deficit to the Quadro 2000D is the largest delta in either card's nearest rival list, underscoring that the GT 730M is not merely slightly slower, but a full performance class below.

What does this mean in practical terms? The OpenCL score reflects general-purpose compute workloads, which include tasks like image processing, physics simulation, and certain rendering operations. A 26.5% lead suggests the Quadro 2000D can complete these tasks noticeably faster, potentially cutting processing time by roughly a quarter relative to the GT 730M. For professional applications that rely on OpenCL acceleration, this difference could translate into tangible productivity gains.

However, the GT 730M has one benchmark the Quadro 2000D does not: a Geekbench Vulkan score of 3524. The Quadro 2000D has no recorded Vulkan result, so the database offers no head-to-head comparison for that API. The GT 730M's Vulkan score is higher than its OpenCL score, which is typical for newer architectures with better driver support for modern APIs. Still, without a Quadro 2000D Vulkan number, the data cannot establish which GPU would win in Vulkan-specific workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 2000D, with an average score of 3930 versus 3316 for the GeForce GT 730M. The head-to-head OpenCL test shows the Quadro leading by 26.5% (3930 vs 3107).

Q: How does the Quadro 2000D compare to its closest rivals?

A: It is 0.3% ahead of the Quadro K2000D (3919), 0.6% behind the GeForce GT 745M (3953), and 0.7% behind both the AMD Radeon R5 M420 (3956) and GeForce 830M (3957). These deltas are all under 1%, indicating near-parity with this group.

Q: What about the GT 730M's nearest competitors?

A: The GT 730M is 0.5% behind the Intel HD Graphics 530 (3332), 2.2% behind the Intel HD Graphics P4600 (3389), 0.9% ahead of the GeForce 920M (3287), and 3.3% ahead of the GeForce GT 640 (3210). Its results cluster in a lower performance band than the Quadro 2000D's rivals.

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

A: The GT 730M has a recorded Vulkan score of 3524, while the Quadro 2000D has no Vulkan benchmark in the database. This means the GT 730M can be evaluated in Vulkan workloads, but direct comparison is impossible without a Quadro 2000D Vulkan score.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two?

A: The GT 730M has a transistor density of 10.8M per mm², while the Quadro 2000D has 4.9M per mm². This reflects the GT 730M's smaller 118 mm² die containing 1,270 million transistors versus the Quadro 2000D's 238 mm² die with 1,170 million transistors.

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Quadro 2000D, at 41.60 GB/s, compared to the GT 730M's 28.80 GB/s. The Quadro uses GDDR5 memory while the GT 730M uses DDR3, both on a 128-bit bus, but the Quadro's memory runs at 2.6 Gbps effective versus 1800 Mbps effective for the GT 730M.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different NVIDIA architectural generations, and that distinction explains much of their performance and feature divergence. The Quadro 2000D uses the GF106 chip built on the Fermi architecture, manufactured on a 40 nm process at TSMC. The GT 730M uses the GK107 chip based on the Kepler architecture, also from TSMC but on a 28 nm process. The newer process node allows the GT 730M to pack more transistors into a smaller area: 1,270 million transistors on a 118 mm² die, yielding a density of 10.8M per mm². The Quadro 2000D has 1,170 million transistors spread across a 238 mm² die, for a density of just 4.9M per mm².

This density advantage does not translate into a compute advantage, as the benchmark data shows. The Fermi architecture in the Quadro 2000D was designed for professional workloads, with a focus on double-precision and compute accuracy that the consumer-oriented Kepler architecture lacks. The Quadro 2000D's shading units, 192 in total, are fewer than the GT 730M's 384, but the Quadro's higher memory bandwidth and older architecture deliver superior OpenCL performance in the recorded tests.

Both GPUs have 32 texture mapping units and 16 raster output units, so the pixel and texture processing pipelines are structurally similar. However, the clock behavior differs: the GT 730M has a base clock of 725 MHz and a boost clock of 725 MHz, while the Quadro 2000D has no recorded base or boost clock. The GT 730M's fixed clock yields a pixel rate of 5.800 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 23.20 GTexel/s. The Quadro 2000D, despite lacking a listed clock, achieves a pixel rate of 5.000 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 20.00 GTexel/s, meaning the GT 730M has slightly higher fill rates despite its lower overall compute score.

API support also differs. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but the GT 730M adds Vulkan 1.2.175 support while the Quadro 2000D has no Vulkan entry. This makes the GT 730M more compatible with modern cross-platform graphics APIs, even if its raw performance in OpenCL is substantially lower.

Specification Differences

The most obvious difference is memory configuration. The Quadro 2000D has 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory with a 128-bit bus and 41.60 GB/s bandwidth. The GT 730M has 2 GB of DDR3 memory, also on a 128-bit bus, but with only 28.80 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro's GDDR5 memory operates at 2.6 Gbps effective, while the GT 730M's DDR3 runs at 1800 Mbps effective. The Quadro has half the capacity but 44% more bandwidth, which is a critical factor for memory-intensive compute tasks.

The compute units differ significantly. The Quadro 2000D has 192 shading units, while the GT 730M has 384. Both have 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs. The FP32 performance reflects this: the Quadro delivers 480.0 GFLOPS, while the GT 730M delivers 556.8 GFLOPS. Despite having fewer shading units, the GT 730M achieves higher raw FP32 throughput, yet loses in the actual OpenCL benchmark by 26.5%. This suggests the Quadro's memory bandwidth advantage and driver optimizations for compute workloads more than compensate for its lower shader count.

Power and physical specifications diverge sharply. The Quadro 2000D has a TDP of 62 W and is a single-slot card measuring 178 mm in length and 111 mm in height, with no power connectors required and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The GT 730M has a TDP of 33 W and uses an MXM module form factor, with no length or height recorded. Its power comes from the host laptop, and it has no suggested PSU rating. The Quadro's display outputs are 2x DVI, while the GT 730M's are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," reflecting its mobile design.

The bus interface also differs: the Quadro 2000D uses PCIe 2.0 x16, while the GT 730M uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The newer bus standard on the GT 730M offers higher theoretical bandwidth, but the Quadro's older PCIe 2.0 interface is not a bottleneck given its actual performance in the recorded tests.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro 2000D wins in compute-heavy workloads that leverage OpenCL. Its 26.5% lead in the Geekbench OpenCL test, combined with its 41.60 GB/s memory bandwidth, makes it the stronger choice for tasks like scientific simulation, image analysis, or any professional application that offloads parallel processing to the GPU. The Quadro's positioning in the nearest rival list, within 0.7% of the GeForce 830M and Radeon R5 M420, confirms it is a legitimate mid-range compute part, not an outlier.

The GT 730M wins in scenarios where its Vulkan support matters. With a Vulkan score of 3524, it can run modern graphics workloads that require Vulkan 1.2.175, which the Quadro 2000D cannot. This makes the GT 730M more relevant for contemporary game engines or compute frameworks that have moved to Vulkan as their primary API. Its higher FP32 rating (556.8 GFLOPS vs 480.0 GFLOPS) also suggests it has theoretical compute headroom, even if its OpenCL implementation underdelivers.

The GT 730M also wins on power efficiency. Its 33 W TDP is roughly half the Quadro 2000D's 62 W, and its MXM form factor means it is designed for laptops where thermal and power constraints are critical. The Quadro 2000D's single-slot desktop design and 250 W suggested PSU make it unsuitable for portable systems.

Memory capacity favors the GT 730M. Its 2 GB of VRAM doubles the Quadro 2000D's 1 GB, which matters for workloads that need to hold larger datasets locally on the GPU. The Quadro's bandwidth advantage does not help if the dataset exceeds its memory capacity, forcing costly transfers to and from system memory.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture for different use cases. For professional compute workloads, the Quadro 2000D is the superior choice. Its 26.5% OpenCL lead over the GT 730M is decisive, and its nearest rivals (Quadro K2000D, GeForce GT 745M) are all within 0.7%, indicating it competes well in its class. Anyone running OpenCL-accelerated applications such as CAD, medical imaging, or data analysis should favor the Quadro 2000D, despite its older Fermi architecture and lower shader count.

For mobile users or those needing Vulkan compatibility, the GT 730M is the only option between these two. Its MXM form factor and 33 W TDP make it suitable for laptops, while its Vulkan 1.2.175 support opens modern API workloads that the Quadro cannot access. Its higher FP32 rating and double memory capacity also give it advantages in scenarios that are shader-bound or memory-capacity-bound.

The Verdict: pick the Quadro 2000D if OpenCL performance, memory bandwidth, and professional reliability are the priorities. Pick the GT 730M if you need Vulkan support, lower power draw, mobile compatibility, or more VRAM. The Quadro wins the only direct benchmark, but the GT 730M's feature set addresses needs the Quadro cannot meet.