GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro 3000M and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M represent two distinct approaches to mobile graphics from different eras. The data shows a clear performance hierarchy, but the architectural differences between the Fermi-based professional card and the Kepler-based consumer card are substantial. This analysis walks through the benchmark results, architecture, and specifications to determine where each GPU holds an advantage.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data is decisive in one category and absent in another. In the single shared test, Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro 3000M wins outright with a score of 3718 against the GT 730M's 3107, a margin of 19.7%. This is the only head-to-head benchmark where both GPUs were measured, and it gives the Quadro 3000M a 1-0 win record in direct comparisons.

The GT 730M does not win any of the shared benchmark tests. However, it has a distinct advantage in compatibility and feature support. The GT 730M runs Vulkan 1.2.175, whereas the Quadro 3000M has no Vulkan support listed. In Geekbench Vulkan, the GT 730M scores 3524, a result that cannot be matched by the Quadro 3000M since that test requires Vulkan hardware support. For workloads that rely on modern graphics APIs, the GT 730M is the only option of the two.

The use-case split is therefore straightforward: the Quadro 3000M is the faster GPU in raw compute performance, while the GT 730M is the more modern and feature-complete GPU for contemporary software environments. The Quadro 3000M's 22nd percentile ranking among all GPUs, compared to the GT 730M's 20th percentile, confirms that the Quadro sits slightly higher in the overall performance distribution.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations. The Quadro 3000M is built on the Fermi architecture with the GF104 chip, while the GT 730M uses the Kepler architecture with the GK107 chip. This generational gap is visible in nearly every design decision.

The manufacturing process differs significantly. The Quadro 3000M uses a 40 nm process from TSMC, while the GT 730M uses a more advanced 28 nm process, also from TSMC. The transistor counts reflect this: the Quadro 3000M packs 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 5.9M per mm². The GT 730M has 1,270 million transistors on a much smaller 118 mm² die, achieving a higher density of 10.8M per mm². The newer process allows the GT 730M to be more compact and efficient.

Core configurations tell a mixed story. The Quadro 3000M has 240 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The GT 730M has more shading units at 384, but fewer TMUs (32) and half the ROPs (16). This means the Quadro 3000M is built for higher fill-rate workloads, while the GT 730M has more raw compute shader capacity. The clock speeds differ: the GT 730M runs at a base and boost of 725 MHz, while the Quadro 3000M's core clock is not specified in the data.

Memory architecture is a major divergence. The Quadro 3000M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 80.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The GT 730M has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, yielding only 28.80 GB/s. This is a 2.8x advantage in raw memory bandwidth for the Quadro 3000M, which is critical for bandwidth-sensitive tasks.

Power consumption is dramatically different. The Quadro 3000M has a 75 W TDP, while the GT 730M sips power at 33 W. Both use MXM Module slot width and have no power connectors, but the GT 730M connects via PCIe 3.0 x16, whereas the Quadro 3000M uses the older MXM-B (3.0) interface. The GT 730M is also part of the GeForce 700M generation, while the Quadro 3000M belongs to the Quadro Fermi-M (x000M) generation.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single head-to-head result is the Geekbench OpenCL test. The Quadro 3000M scores 3718, while the GT 730M scores 3107. The delta is 19.7% in favor of the Quadro 3000M. This is a substantial margin that shows the older professional card outperforms the newer consumer card in general-purpose compute.

To contextualize the Quadro 3000M's score, its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M with a score of 3717 (0% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M at 3740 (-0.6%), the NVIDIA GeForce 825M at 3694 (0.6%), and the AMD Radeon HD 6770 at 3649 (1.9%). The Quadro 3000M sits almost exactly in the middle of this pack, slightly behind the GT 635M and slightly ahead of the GT 740M. Its competition is tight at this performance level.

The GT 730M's nearest rivals are mostly integrated graphics. The Intel HD Graphics 530 scores 3332 (-0.5% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce 920M scores 3287 (0.9%), the Intel HD Graphics P4600 scores 3389 (-2.2%), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 640 scores 3210 (3.3%). The GT 730M is positioned at the low end of this group, trailing both Intel integrated solutions and the GeForce 920M. Its 3.3% lead over the GeForce GT 640 is its only win among its closest competitors.

The GT 730M also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 3524, which shows that in modern API workloads, it can produce competitive numbers even though its OpenCL score lags. This Vulkan score is higher than its OpenCL score, indicating that the Kepler architecture responds well to modern low-level APIs.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear conclusion: the Quadro 3000M is the faster GPU in compute performance, and the GT 730M is the more efficient and modern option. Choose the Quadro 3000M if raw OpenCL performance is the priority. Its 19.7% lead over the GT 730M in the only shared benchmark is decisive, and its 80.00 GB/s memory bandwidth is a massive advantage for data-heavy workloads. The 75 W TDP is the price of that performance, but for applications that need bandwidth and fill-rate, it is the correct choice.

Choose the GT 730M if software compatibility and power efficiency matter more. Its Vulkan 1.2.175 support makes it usable in environments where the Quadro 3000M is not, and its 33 W TDP is less than half the Quadro's power draw. The 2.5x density improvement (10.8M vs 5.9M transistors per mm²) and smaller die size show a more modern design that runs cooler and less demanding on system thermals. The GT 730M's 384 shading units also give it more parallel compute capacity, even if memory bandwidth limits its real-world performance.

The percentile rankings reinforce this split: the Quadro 3000M's 22nd percentile is slightly above the GT 730M's 20th percentile, but both are firmly in the lower half of all GPUs. Neither card is a high-performance champion by modern standards. The Quadro 3000M is a workstation-oriented part that excels in specific professional tasks, while the GT 730M is a mainstream mobile chip that prioritizes efficiency and API support.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 3000M scores 3718, which is 19.7% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M's 3107.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each GPU have?

A: The Quadro 3000M has 80.00 GB/s from 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. The GT 730M has 28.80 GB/s from 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: Does the GT 730M support Vulkan?

A: Yes, the GT 730M supports Vulkan 1.2.175 and has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 3524. The Quadro 3000M does not list any Vulkan support.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The Quadro 3000M has a 75 W TDP, while the GT 730M has a 33 W TDP. Both use MXM Module slot width and have no power connectors.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The GT 730M has 384 shading units, compared to the Quadro 3000M's 240. However, the Quadro 3000M has more texture units (40 vs 32) and more ROPs (32 vs 16).

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each GPU?

A: The Quadro 3000M's closest competitors are the GeForce GT 740M (3717, 0% delta), GeForce GT 635M (3740, -0.6%), and GeForce 825M (3694, 0.6%). The GT 730M's closest are the Intel HD Graphics 530 (3332, -0.5%), GeForce 920M (3287, 0.9%), and Intel HD Graphics P4600 (3389, -2.2%).

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every specification category. The Quadro 3000M uses the GF104 chip with Fermi architecture, while the GT 730M uses GK107 with Kepler architecture. The process nodes differ: 40 nm for the Quadro versus 28 nm for the GT 730M. The Quadro 3000M has 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die (5.9M per mm²), while the GT 730M has 1,270 million on 118 mm² (10.8M per mm²).

Clock speeds are not directly comparable, as the Quadro 3000M's base and boost clocks are not listed, while the GT 730M runs at 725 MHz base and boost. Memory clocks differ: the Quadro uses 625 MHz (2.5 Gbps effective) GDDR5, while the GT 730M uses 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) DDR3. The memory bus is 256-bit for the Quadro versus 128-bit for the GT 730M.

Shader configurations differ significantly: 240 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 32 ROPs for the Quadro; 384 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs for the GT 730M. Pixel rate is 4.500 GPixel/s for the Quadro versus 5.800 GPixel/s for the GT 730M, despite the GT 730M having fewer ROPs. Texture rate is 18.00 GTexel/s for the Quadro versus 23.20 GTexel/s for the GT 730M. FP32 performance is 432.0 GFLOPS for the Quadro versus 556.8 GFLOPS for the GT 730M.

Power and interface specs differ: 75 W TDP for the Quadro versus 33 W for the GT 730M. The Quadro uses MXM-B (3.0) bus interface, while the GT 730M uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but only the GT 730M lists Vulkan 1.2.175. Release dates are 2011-02-21 for the Quadro and 2013-01-19 for the GT 730M, with the Quadro preceding the Quadro Kepler-M and the GT 730M following the GeForce 600M and preceding the GeForce 800M.