GPU Comparison

The benchmark data places the NVIDIA Quadro 2000M and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M in the same performance tier, with the Quadro holding a narrow but consistent edge in the single available compute test. The Quadro 2000M wins the only head-to-head benchmark, yet the GT 730M counters with a newer architecture, superior thermal efficiency, and a broader feature set. The choice between these two end-of-life mobile GPUs depends entirely on whether raw OpenCL compute or architectural modernity and efficiency take priority.

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 Quadro 2000M scores 3434, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M scores 3107. This gives the Quadro a 10.5% advantage, a decisive margin in a single test but not an overwhelming one. The Quadro’s win is notable because it achieves this despite being based on the older Fermi architecture and having fewer shading units.

The GT 730M’s average benchmark score, however, tells a more nuanced story. When including its Vulkan result of 3524, the GT 730M’s average across two tests is 3316, compared to the Quadro’s single-score average of 3434. The Quadro is still ahead in average terms, but the GT 730M’s Vulkan score of 3524 is actually higher than the Quadro’s OpenCL score of 3434. This suggests that in Vulkan-based workloads, the GT 730M would likely outperform the Quadro, though no direct Vulkan score exists for the Quadro to confirm this.

Looking at the nearest rivals provides additional context for both cards. The Quadro 2000M’s score of 3434 places it just 0.1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 (score 3431), and 1.3% ahead of the Intel HD Graphics P4600 (score 3389). It trails the NVIDIA GeForce 920MX (score 3528) by 2.7% but beats the Intel HD Graphics 530 (score 3332) by 3.1%. The GT 730M’s average score of 3316 puts it 0.5% behind the Intel HD Graphics 530, 0.9% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 920M (score 3287), 2.2% behind the Intel HD Graphics P4600, and 3.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 640 (score 3210). These figures show both cards clustering tightly with integrated graphics and low-end discrete GPUs from the same era.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent distinct architectural generations from NVIDIA. The Quadro 2000M uses the GF106 chip based 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 more advanced 28 nm process. This process shrink is significant: the Quadro’s die size is 238 mm² with 1,170 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 4.9M / mm². The GT 730M packs 1,270 million transistors into a much smaller 118 mm² die, achieving a density of 10.8M / mm², more than double the Quadro’s density.

The GT 730M’s Kepler architecture doubles the shading unit count, with 384 shading units compared to the Quadro’s 192. Both cards have 32 texture mapping units and 16 raster output units, but the GT 730M’s higher base clock of 725 MHz (the Quadro has no listed base or boost clock) gives it higher peak rates. The GT 730M achieves 5.800 GPixel/s pixel fill rate and 23.20 GTexel/s texture fill rate, versus the Quadro’s 4.400 GPixel/s and 17.60 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance follows the same pattern: the GT 730M delivers 556.8 GFLOPS FP32 compute, while the Quadro manages 422.4 GFLOPS.

Memory configurations are identical on paper: both use 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128 bit bus, with 900 MHz memory clock and 1800 Mbps effective speed, producing 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth. API support differs mainly in Vulkan: the GT 730M supports Vulkan 1.2.175, while the Quadro lists no Vulkan support. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. The GT 730M uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 bus interface, while the Quadro uses MXM-A (3.0). Both are MXM Module slot width, use no power connectors, and have portable-device-dependent display outputs.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro 2000M wins decisively in OpenCL compute performance. Its score of 3434 versus the GT 730M’s 3107 represents a 10.5% lead, which is meaningful for applications that rely heavily on OpenCL acceleration. The Quadro also holds a slight advantage in average benchmark score (3434 vs 3316), and its percentile ranking of 21 versus the GT 730M’s 20 indicates it sits marginally higher among all GPUs. For users running OpenCL-based professional applications, the Quadro is the safer choice based on this data.

The GT 730M wins in efficiency and architectural capability. Its 33 W TDP is substantially lower than the Quadro’s 55 W, meaning it generates less heat and consumes less power, a critical factor in laptops. The GT 730M’s Vulkan support (1.2.175) gives it access to modern graphics APIs that the Quadro lacks entirely. Its higher pixel rate (5.800 GPixel/s vs 4.400 GPixel/s) and texture rate (23.20 GTexel/s vs 17.60 GTexel/s) suggest better rasterization performance in games and graphics workloads, even though the OpenCL test favors the Quadro. The GT 730M’s Vulkan score of 3524 also exceeds the Quadro’s OpenCL score, hinting at stronger performance in Vulkan-based titles.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 2000M scores 3434 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M scores 3107, giving the Quadro a 10.5% lead in that specific test.

Q: Does the GT 730M support modern graphics APIs?

A: Yes, the GT 730M supports Vulkan 1.2.175, along with DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. The Quadro 2000M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6 but has no listed Vulkan support.

Q: How do these cards compare in power consumption?

A: The GT 730M has a TDP of 33 W, while the Quadro 2000M has a TDP of 55 W. The GT 730M is significantly more power-efficient.

Q: What are the memory specifications of both cards?

A: Both cards have 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 128 bit bus, with 900 MHz memory clock and 28.80 GB/s bandwidth. The memory configurations are identical.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The GT 730M has 384 shading units, double the Quadro 2000M’s 192. The GT 730M also has a higher FP32 compute rate of 556.8 GFLOPS versus 422.4 GFLOPS.

Q: How do these cards rank against their nearest competitors?

A: The Quadro 2000M is 0.1% ahead of the GeForce GT 740 and 1.3% ahead of the Intel HD Graphics P4600. The GT 730M is 0.9% ahead of the GeForce 920M and 3.3% ahead of the GeForce GT 640.

Specification Differences

• Chip: GF106 (Quadro) vs GK107 (GT 730M)
• Architecture: Fermi vs Kepler
• Generation: Quadro Fermi-M (x000M) vs GeForce 700M
• Process Node: 40 nm vs 28 nm
• Transistors: 1,170 million vs 1,270 million
• Die Size: 238 mm² vs 118 mm²
• Transistor Density: 4.9M / mm² vs 10.8M / mm²
• Base Clock: None listed vs 725 MHz
• Boost Clock: None listed vs 725 MHz
• Shading Units: 192 vs 384
• Pixel Rate: 4.400 GPixel/s vs 5.800 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 17.60 GTexel/s vs 23.20 GTexel/s
• FP32: 422.4 GFLOPS vs 556.8 GFLOPS
• TDP: 55 W vs 33 W
• Bus Interface: MXM-A (3.0) vs PCIe 3.0 x16
• Vulkan Support: None vs 1.2.175
• Release Date: 2011-01-12 vs 2013-01-19
• Predecessor: Quadro FX Mobile vs GeForce 600M
• Successor: Quadro Kepler-M vs GeForce 800M
• Geekbench OpenCL Score: 3434 vs 3107
• Average Benchmark Score: 3434 vs 3316
• Percentile: 21 vs 20

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split decision. For users prioritizing OpenCL compute performance, the NVIDIA Quadro 2000M is the better choice, its 10.5% lead over the GT 730M in the only head-to-head test is substantial, and its average benchmark score (3434 vs 3316) confirms this advantage. The Quadro’s higher percentile ranking (21 vs 20) reinforces its edge in overall performance among all GPUs.

However, for users prioritizing efficiency, modern API support, and rasterization throughput, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M is the stronger pick. Its 33 W TDP versus 55 W makes it far more suitable for thin-and-light laptops. Its Vulkan support opens doors to modern games and applications that the Quadro cannot access. The GT 730M’s higher pixel rate (5.800 GPixel/s vs 4.400 GPixel/s) and texture rate (23.20 GTexel/s vs 17.60 GTexel/s), combined with double the shading units (384 vs 192), indicate better raw graphics capability in traditional rendering workloads. Its Vulkan score of 3524 also exceeds the Quadro’s OpenCL score, suggesting that in Vulkan-based scenarios, the GT 730M would likely win outright.

The final verdict: the Quadro 2000M is the compute-focused professional card, winning the OpenCL test that matters for certain workstation tasks. The GT 730M is the more balanced, modern, and efficient GPU, offering better architecture, lower power draw, and broader API support. For most users, the GT 730M’s advantages in efficiency and features outweigh the Quadro’s single-test compute victory. Only those running specific OpenCL-heavy professional workloads should favor the Quadro 2000M.