NVIDIA GeForce GT 735M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Comparison

The data places the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 735M in the same performance tier, separated by a razor-thin margin in average benchmark scores. The GTX 1050 holds an average score of 3629, while the GT 735M trails at 3616, a difference of just 0.4 percent. Both cards sit at the 21st percentile of all GPUs, meaning the vast majority of graphics hardware outperforms them. This is a comparison of two end-of-life parts with a massive architectural gap, yet their overall scores suggest they are closer in real-world aggregate performance than their specifications would imply.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it is a decisive victory for the GTX 1050. The GTX 1050 scores 15233, while the GT 735M scores 3616, giving the newer card a 321.3 percent advantage. This is not a marginal win; it is a four-fold difference in raw compute throughput as measured by Geekbench. The data indicates that in any OpenCL compute workload, the GTX 1050 will finish the job in a fraction of the time required by the GT 735M.

However, the aggregate picture is more nuanced. The GTX 1050’s average benchmark score of 3629 is built from eleven tests, including DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 passes, a G2D score, a G3D score, and several Geekbench compute tests. Its best result is the Geekbench OpenCL score of 15233, but its Passmark G3D score is 5028, and its Passmark G2D score is 457. It also registers lower scores in legacy DirectX tests, such as 83 in DirectX 9, 38 in DirectX 11, 24 in DirectX 10, and 20 in DirectX 12. The GT 735M, by contrast, has only a single benchmark result: the Geekbench OpenCL score of 3616, which also serves as its average score.

This asymmetry in data collection is critical. The GTX 1050’s average is dragged down by its many low DirectX scores, while the GT 735M’s average reflects only its one compute test. The nearest rivals for the GTX 1050 include the AMD Radeon HD 6770 with an average score of 3649 (0.5 percent higher), the RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation at 3596 (0.9 percent lower), and the GeForce GT 545 at 3594 (1 percent lower). For the GT 735M, the nearest rivals are the GTX 1050 at 3629 (0.3 percent higher), the RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation at 3596 (0.6 percent higher), and the GeForce GT 545 at 3594 (0.6 percent higher). In both cases, the field is tightly packed within a 1.5 percent range, suggesting that aggregate scores alone do not separate these cards meaningfully.

Architecture Differences

The GTX 1050 is built on the GP107 chip using the Pascal architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at Samsung. It packs 3,300 million transistors into a 132 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 25.0 million per square millimeter. The GT 735M, in contrast, uses the GK208 chip with the Kepler 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 1,020 million transistors on a smaller 87 mm² die, with a density of 11.7 million per square millimeter. This means the GTX 1050 has more than three times the transistor count and more than double the transistor density, reflecting the generational leap in manufacturing.

Clock speeds also differ dramatically. The GTX 1050 runs at a base clock of 1354 MHz with a boost clock of 1455 MHz, while the GT 735M operates at a much lower base of 575 MHz and a boost of 628 MHz. Memory clocks are similarly lopsided: the GTX 1050 uses 1752 MHz memory with 7 Gbps effective speed, whereas the GT 735M uses 900 MHz memory with 1800 Mbps effective speed. The GTX 1050’s memory is GDDR5 with a 128-bit bus and 112.1 GB/s bandwidth, while the GT 735M uses DDR3 with a 64-bit bus and just 14.40 GB/s bandwidth. That is a 7.8-fold difference in memory bandwidth, a figure that directly impacts resolution scaling and texture-heavy scenes.

The compute resources are also unequal. The GTX 1050 has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. The GT 735M has 384 shading units, 32 TMUs, and only 8 ROPs. Pixel rate for the GTX 1050 is 46.56 GPixel/s versus 5.024 GPixel/s for the GT 735M, a 9.3-fold gap. Texture rate is 58.20 GTexel/s versus 20.10 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 1.862 TFLOPS for the GTX 1050 versus 482.3 GFLOPS for the GT 735M. The GTX 1050 also supports FP16 at 29.10 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio), a feature the GT 735M lacks entirely.

Power consumption is another differentiator. The GTX 1050 has a TDP of 75 W and is a dual-slot card with no power connectors, requiring a 250 W suggested PSU. The GT 735M is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with a 33 W TDP and no power connectors. The bus interface differs as well: the GTX 1050 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the GT 735M uses PCIe 3.0 x8. API support is close but not identical: both support DirectX 12, but the GTX 1050 supports 12_1 while the GT 735M supports only 11_0. OpenGL is 4.6 for both, but Vulkan support is 1.4 for the GTX 1050 versus 1.2.175 for the GT 735M.

The Verdict

The data shows a clear split: the GTX 1050 is overwhelmingly faster in compute and memory bandwidth, while the GT 735M is more power-efficient and has a lower thermal footprint. If the workload is OpenCL compute, the GTX 1050 is 321.3 percent faster, which is a decisive margin. If the workload is legacy DirectX 9 or 10, the GTX 1050 still wins, but the margin is far smaller, and the absolute scores are low for both cards. For gaming, the GTX 1050’s higher pixel rate and texture rate suggest it will handle modern titles better, but the data does not include a dedicated gaming benchmark.

The GT 735M wins only in power consumption, with a 33 W TDP versus 75 W, and in its IGP form factor, which requires no expansion slot. For a user with a portable device that has a soldered GT 735M, the upgrade path is not to another GT 735M but to a dedicated card like the GTX 1050. However, the GTX 1050’s dual-slot design and 250 W PSU requirement mean it is not a drop-in replacement for every system. The aggregate scores are close, but the distribution of those scores is not: the GTX 1050 has a high ceiling and a low floor, while the GT 735M has only a single data point.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The GTX 1050 has an average benchmark score of 3629, which is 0.4 percent higher than the GT 735M’s average of 3616.

Q: How much faster is the GTX 1050 in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The GTX 1050 scores 15233 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the GT 735M scores 3616, giving the GTX 1050 a 321.3 percent advantage.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two cards?

A: The GTX 1050 has a memory bandwidth of 112.1 GB/s, while the GT 735M has 14.40 GB/s, a roughly 7.8-fold difference.

Q: Do both cards support DirectX 12?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12, but the GTX 1050 supports version 12_1, while the GT 735M supports version 11_0.

Q: Which card has a lower TDP?

A: The GT 735M has a TDP of 33 W, compared to the GTX 1050’s 75 W.

Q: What is the transistor density of each card?

A: The GTX 1050 has a transistor density of 25.0 million per mm², while the GT 735M has 11.7 million per mm².

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 1050 wins in every measurable performance category except power draw. It has higher clock speeds, more shading units, more TMUs, more ROPs, higher pixel and texture rates, higher FP32 throughput, and vastly higher memory bandwidth. It also supports newer API versions, including DirectX 12_1 and Vulkan 1.4, versus the GT 735M’s DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. The GTX 1050 is the clear choice for any workload that stresses the GPU, from OpenCL compute to modern DirectX 12 titles.

The GT 735M wins in efficiency and form factor. Its 33 W TDP is less than half the GTX 1050’s 75 W, and its IGP design means it is integrated into the motherboard or processor package, requiring no separate power connectors or expansion slot. It also has a smaller die size at 87 mm² versus 132 mm², which contributes to its lower power draw. For a thin-and-light laptop where battery life and thermals are paramount, the GT 735M is the more practical option, provided the user accepts its limited performance.

The GTX 1050 also wins in production status parity: both are end-of-life, but the GTX 1050 has a successor (GeForce 20), while the GT 735M’s successor is the GeForce 800M. The GTX 1050 was released on 2016-10-24, while the GT 735M was released on 2013-03-31, a gap of over three years. This generational difference is reflected in the architecture and process node, with the GTX 1050 using 14 nm versus 28 nm for the GT 735M.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in almost every significant specification. The GTX 1050 uses the Pascal architecture on a 14 nm Samsung process, while the GT 735M uses Kepler 2.0 on a 28 nm TSMC process. Transistor count is 3,300 million versus 1,020 million, and die size is 132 mm² versus 87 mm². Base clock is 1354 MHz versus 575 MHz, boost clock is 1455 MHz versus 628 MHz. Memory type is GDDR5 versus DDR3, with bus widths of 128 bit versus 64 bit, and bandwidth of 112.1 GB/s versus 14.40 GB/s.

Shading units are 640 versus 384, TMUs are 40 versus 32, and ROPs are 32 versus 8. Pixel rate is 46.56 GPixel/s versus 5.024 GPixel/s, texture rate is 58.20 GTexel/s versus 20.10 GTexel/s, and FP32 is 1.862 TFLOPS versus 482.3 GFLOPS. The GTX 1050 has FP16 support at 29.10 GFLOPS, while the GT 735M has none. TDP is 75 W versus 33 W, and slot width is dual-slot versus IGP. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x8. Display outputs are 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a on the GTX 1050, versus “Portable Device Dependent” on the GT 735M. The GTX 1050 has a launch MSRP of 109 USD; the GT 735M has no launch MSRP listed. The GTX 1050 measures 145 mm in length and 111 mm in height, while the GT 735M has no listed dimensions.