NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M vs NVIDIA RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation Comparison

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data for these two mobile GPUs comes from different test suites, so a direct same-test comparison is not available. However, the available scores and their relative standing among all GPUs paint a clear picture of their respective performance tiers.

The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation achieves a score of 3596 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. This places it at the 21st percentile among all GPUs. Its closest rival in the database is the NVIDIA GeForce GT 545, which scores 3594, putting the RTX 5000 Mobile a marginal 0.1% ahead. The delta to other nearby competitors is equally tight: it trails the GeForce GT 735M by 0.6% (3616 vs 3596), the GeForce GTX 1050 by 0.9% (3629 vs 3596), and the AMD Radeon HD 6770 by 1.5% (3649 vs 3596). These sub-2% differences indicate that, in this specific DX12 workload, the RTX 5000 Mobile sits in a very crowded performance band where even minor clock variations can flip the ranking.

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M, by contrast, has no 3DMark Steel Nomad score. Its benchmark results come from Geekbench OpenCL (3107) and Geekbench Vulkan (3524), yielding an average benchmark score of 3316. This places it at the 20th percentile among all GPUs, just one percentile point below the RTX 5000 Mobile. Its nearest rivals in the database include the Intel HD Graphics 530 (avg score 3332, delta -0.5%), NVIDIA GeForce 920M (3287, delta +0.9%), Intel HD Graphics P4600 (3389, delta -2.2%), and NVIDIA GeForce GT 640 (3210, delta +3.3%). The GT 730M's 3.3% advantage over the GT 640 is its largest margin among these neighbors, while its 2.2% deficit to the Intel P4600 is its biggest shortfall.

The most striking takeaway from the raw numbers is the scale of architectural generation gap. The RTX 5000 Mobile's single 3DMark score of 3596 is 8.4% higher than the GT 730M's average benchmark score of 3316, but this understates the real divide. The GT 730M's best single result (3524 in Vulkan) still trails the RTX 5000 Mobile's DX12 score by 2.0%. More tellingly, the two GPUs occupy nearly identical percentile ranks (21st vs 20th), yet the RTX 5000 Mobile achieves this with a workload that heavily stresses modern features like ray tracing and mesh shaders — a workload the GT 730M's Kepler architecture cannot even run at full fidelity given its DirectX 12 (11_0) API support.

# Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm between these two parts is enormous, reflecting roughly a decade of GPU evolution. The RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation is built on the AD103 chip using TSMC's 5 nm process, packing 45,900 million transistors into a 379 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 121.1 million per square millimeter. In contrast, the GT 730M uses the GK107 chip on TSMC's 28 nm process, with just 1,270 million transistors on a 118 mm² die, for a density of 10.8 million per square millimeter. The RTX 5000 Mobile therefore packs roughly 36 times more transistors into about 3.2 times the die area.

The compute resources differ by an order of magnitude across every unit type. The RTX 5000 Mobile has 9,728 shading units, 304 texture mapping units, and 112 ROPs. The GT 730M has 384 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. That represents a 25.3x increase in shading units, a 9.5x increase in TMUs, and a 7x increase in ROPs. Clock speeds also diverge significantly: the RTX 5000 Mobile runs at a 1425 MHz base and 2115 MHz boost, while the GT 730M is fixed at 725 MHz for both base and boost — a 2.9x boost-clock advantage for the newer part.

The RTX 5000 Mobile introduces hardware features that simply do not exist in the GT 730M. It has 76 ray tracing cores and 304 tensor cores, both of which are null or absent in the Kepler-based GT 730M. This enables hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI-driven DLSS, capabilities that the GT 730M cannot emulate through any software path. The RTX 5000 Mobile also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the GT 730M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) — a meaningful gap for modern game titles that require Shader Model 6.5 features. Vulkan support also differs: 1.4 on the RTX 5000 Mobile versus 1.2.175 on the GT 730M.

Memory architecture reinforces the generational leap. The RTX 5000 Mobile ships with 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GT 730M has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, with 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth — a 20x bandwidth deficit. Memory clocks are 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) versus 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) respectively. Pixel and texture fill rates tell a similar story: 236.9 GPixel/s versus 5.8 GPixel/s, and 643.0 GTexel/s versus 23.2 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute rating is 41.15 TFLOPS for the RTX 5000 Mobile versus 556.8 GFLOPS for the GT 730M — a 73.9x gap. The RTX 5000 Mobile also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio (41.15 TFLOPS), a feature entirely absent from the GT 730M's specification sheet.

# Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation wins in every scenario that demands modern rendering features, high resolution, or compute-intensive workloads. Its 16 GB GDDR6 frame buffer at 576 GB/s makes it suitable for 4K texture packs, large simulation datasets, and professional visualization tasks. The 76 RT cores and 304 tensor cores enable hardware ray tracing and AI-based upscaling, which the GT 730M cannot attempt. The 41.15 TFLOPS FP32 throughput supports complex scientific compute and deep learning inference, while the FP16 1:1 ratio doubles that headroom for mixed-precision workloads. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4 support ensure compatibility with current and near-future API feature sets. The 120 W TDP, while higher, is appropriate for a high-end mobile workstation part, and the IGP slot width indicates it is designed for soldered integration into premium laptops.

The GT 730M's strengths are confined to legacy compatibility and power efficiency. Its 33 W TDP is roughly one-quarter of the RTX 5000 Mobile's 120 W TDP, making it far more suitable for thin-and-light notebooks where thermal headroom is minimal. Its 2 GB DDR3 memory is adequate for 1080p gaming at low-to-medium settings in older titles, and its Kepler architecture supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175, which covers most esports and indie games from the mid-2010s. The MXM Module slot width suggests it was designed as a replaceable mobile graphics card, offering upgrade potential in older laptop platforms. Its 28 nm process, while ancient by modern standards, is a proven mature node with well-understood thermal characteristics.

In practical terms, the RTX 5000 Mobile is the clear choice for any workload that uses modern graphics APIs, ray tracing, or tensor-core acceleration. The GT 730M retains relevance only for very low-power systems or as a display adapter for basic desktop and office tasks. The benchmark data confirms this: despite both GPUs sitting near the 20th percentile, the RTX 5000 Mobile achieves that with current-generation features in a demanding DX12 test, while the GT 730M relies on older OpenCL and Vulkan workloads that do not stress modern GPU capabilities.

# FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation delivers 41.15 TFLOPS FP32, while the GT 730M provides 556.8 GFLOPS FP32 — a 73.9x advantage for the RTX 5000 Mobile.

Q: Can the GT 730M do hardware ray tracing?

A: No. The GT 730M has no ray tracing cores (null in its specification), while the RTX 5000 Mobile includes 76 dedicated RT cores.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RTX 5000 Mobile has 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth from 16 GB GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus. The GT 730M has 28.80 GB/s from 2 GB DDR3 on a 128-bit bus — a 20x difference.

Q: Which GPU supports newer DirectX features?

A: The RTX 5000 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes features like mesh shaders and variable rate shading. The GT 730M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0).

Q: How do their benchmark percentile ranks compare?

A: The RTX 5000 Mobile sits at the 21st percentile with a 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 3596. The GT 730M is at the 20th percentile with an average score of 3316 across OpenCL and Vulkan tests.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The RTX 5000 Mobile has a 120 W TDP, while the GT 730M has a 33 W TDP. The GT 730M draws about 27.5% of the power of the RTX 5000 Mobile.

# Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation | NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M |

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

| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | Kepler |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 45,900 million | 1,270 million |

| Die Size | 379 mm² | 118 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 121.1M / mm² | 10.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1425 MHz | 725 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2115 MHz | 725 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) | 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 576.0 GB/s | 28.80 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 9728 | 384 |

| TMUs | 304 | 32 |

| ROPs | 112 | 16 |

| RT Cores | 76 | null |

| Tensor Cores | 304 | null |

| Pixel Rate | 236.9 GPixel/s | 5.800 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 643.0 GTexel/s | 23.20 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 41.15 TFLOPS | 556.8 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 41.15 TFLOPS (1:1) | null |

| TDP | 120 W | 33 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | MXM Module |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.2.175 |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2023-03-20 | 2013-01-19 |

| Predecessor | Ampere-MW | GeForce 600M |

| Successor | Blackwell-MW | GeForce 800M |

| Generation | Ada-MW | GeForce 700M |

| Series | GeForce 50-series | null |

The specification table reveals that these two GPUs share only the manufacturer, OpenGL 4.6 support, and the "Portable Device Dependent" display output configuration. Every other measurable specification differs substantially, with the RTX 5000 Mobile leading in all compute, memory, and feature categories except TDP and slot width, where the GT 730M's lower power draw and MXM form factor are its only advantages.