NVIDIA GeForce GT 735M vs NVIDIA Quadro P1000 Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro P1000 and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 735M represent two vastly different eras and purposes in NVIDIA’s lineup. The data shows one is a modern professional workstation component built on the Pascal architecture, while the other is an older, entry-level mobile chip from the Kepler 2.0 generation. The benchmark results highlight a decisive performance gap, but the specifics of where and why that gap exists reveal a more nuanced story about architectural efficiency and intended workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are not close. The Quadro P1000 scores 13,584 points, while the GT 735M manages 3,616 points. This translates to a delta of 275.7% in favor of the Quadro P1000. In practical terms, the Quadro P1000 delivers nearly four times the raw compute performance of the older GeForce chip in this OpenCL workload.

This massive margin is not surprising when looking at the underlying specifications. The Quadro P1000 operates at a base clock of 1266 MHz with a boost up to 1480 MHz, whereas the GT 735M is significantly slower, with a base clock of just 575 MHz and a boost of 628 MHz. The memory subsystem amplifies this difference: the Quadro P1000 utilizes 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth, while the GT 735M is constrained to 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, providing only 14.40 GB/s. The Quadro P1000 offers over five times the memory bandwidth, which is critical for data-intensive OpenCL tasks.

It is worth remembering the GT 735M’s average benchmark score of 3,616 is actually higher than its closest rivals in the data, including the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (3,629, -0.3%) and the AMD Radeon HD 6770 (3,649, -0.9%). This suggests that within its own performance class, the GT 735M is a competitive, if dated, part. However, the Quadro P1000’s average score of 3,163 is slightly below its own nearest rival, the Intel Arc Pro B60 (3,182, -0.6%), indicating that the Quadro P1000 sits at a different tier entirely, one where its OpenCL dominance is offset by weaker results in other benchmark suites.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro P1000 wins the only shared test outright, but the data also provides a broader picture of its capabilities through other benchmark results. In DirectX 9, the Quadro P1000 scores 79 in the Passmark test, which is its strongest DirectX showing. Its DirectX 10 and 11 scores are 21 and 31, respectively, while DirectX 12 drops to 19. These figures suggest that while the card supports DirectX 12 (12_1), its real-world performance in legacy APIs is mixed, and it is not optimized for modern gaming workloads.

The GT 735M, on the other hand, has no DirectX benchmark scores listed. Its only data point is the Geekbench OpenCL score, where it loses decisively. However, its inclusion in the GeForce 700M generation and its support for DirectX 12 (11_0) indicate it was designed for basic mobile graphics in laptops, likely for media playback and light productivity rather than compute-heavy tasks. The Quadro P1000’s professional focus is evident in its Passmark G3D score of 4,512 and GPU Compute score of 1,891, which are not available for the GT 735M but suggest a much stronger overall GPU workload capability.

In terms of use cases, the data implies the Quadro P1000 is built for tasks like CAD, scientific visualization, and GPU-accelerated computing, where OpenCL performance and high memory bandwidth are paramount. The GT 735M, with its low clocks and narrow memory bus, appears suited only for the most basic graphical output, possibly in thin-and-light laptops where power consumption is a priority over performance.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P1000 scores 13,584 in Geekbench OpenCL, compared to the GeForce GT 735M’s 3,616. The Quadro P1000 leads by 275.7%.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare between the two cards?

A: The Quadro P1000 offers 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth from 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. The GT 735M provides 14.40 GB/s from 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus.

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

A: The Quadro P1000 uses a 14 nm process from Samsung, yielding a density of 25.0M transistors per mm². The GT 735M uses a 28 nm process from TSMC, with a density of 11.7M transistors per mm².

Q: Are there any benchmark results where the GT 735M wins?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the Quadro P1000 winning the only shared test (Geekbench OpenCL). The GT 735M has no other benchmark scores in the dataset.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The Quadro P1000 has an average benchmark score of 3,163, while the GT 735M has an average of 3,616. Despite the higher average for the GT 735M, the Quadro P1000 dominates the specific OpenCL test.

Q: Which GPU supports a newer version of Vulkan?

A: The Quadro P1000 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the GT 735M supports Vulkan 1.2.175.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The Quadro P1000 is built on a 14 nm process at Samsung, while the GT 735M uses a 28 nm process at TSMC. The Quadro P1000 has 3,300 million transistors on a 132 mm² die, whereas the GT 735M has 1,020 million transistors on an 87 mm² die. This results in a transistor density of 25.0M per mm² for the Quadro P1000 versus 11.7M per mm² for the GT 735M.

Clock speeds are starkly different: the Quadro P1000 runs at 1266 MHz base and 1480 MHz boost, while the GT 735M runs at 575 MHz base and 628 MHz boost. Memory configurations are also divergent, with the Quadro P1000 offering 4 GB of GDDR5 at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) and the GT 735M offering 2 GB of DDR3 at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective). The memory bus width is 128-bit for the Quadro P1000 versus 64-bit for the GT 735M, leading to bandwidths of 80.19 GB/s and 14.40 GB/s, respectively.

The compute units differ as well: the Quadro P1000 has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, while the GT 735M has 384 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Pixel rates are 47.36 GPixel/s for the Quadro P1000 versus 5.024 GPixel/s for the GT 735M, and texture rates are 59.20 GTexel/s versus 20.10 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 1.894 TFLOPS for the Quadro P1000, while the GT 735M manages 482.3 GFLOPS. The Quadro P1000 also has an FP16 rate of 29.60 GFLOPS (1:64), whereas the GT 735M has no listed FP16 capability.

Power and physical characteristics also diverge. The Quadro P1000 has a TDP of 47 W, is single-slot, and requires no power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 200 W. The GT 735M has a TDP of 33 W and is listed as an IGP (integrated graphics processor), with no suggested PSU. The Quadro P1000 uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the GT 735M uses PCIe 3.0 x8. Display outputs are 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a for the Quadro P1000 versus "Portable Device Dependent" for the GT 735M. The Quadro P1000 has dimensions of 150 mm in length and 69 mm in height, while the GT 735M has no listed dimensions. The Quadro P1000 was released in 2017-02-06, whereas the GT 735M was released in 2013-03-31.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two GPUs is substantial. The Quadro P1000 is based on the GP107 chip using the Pascal architecture, which is a modern design optimized for efficiency and compute throughput. The GT 735M, in contrast, uses the GK208 chip based on the older Kepler 2.0 architecture, which was designed for a different era of graphics processing.

The process node is a key differentiator: the Quadro P1000 uses a 14 nm process, while the GT 735M uses a 28 nm process. This explains the transistor density advantage of the Quadro P1000 (25.0M per mm² versus 11.7M per mm²), even though the GT 735M has a smaller die size (87 mm² versus 132 mm²). The Quadro P1000 packs over three times the transistors into a larger die, enabling significantly more compute resources.

The memory architecture also reflects the generational leap. The Quadro P1000 uses GDDR5 memory with a 128-bit bus, while the GT 735M uses DDR3 with a 64-bit bus. This is a fundamental difference in memory technology, with GDDR5 offering much higher bandwidth per pin. The Quadro P1000’s support for FP16 compute (29.60 GFLOPS) is notable, as it suggests some capability for mixed-precision workloads, whereas the GT 735M has no FP16 support listed.

API support differs in Vulkan version: the Quadro P1000 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the GT 735M supports Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support DirectX 12, but with different feature levels — the Quadro P1000 supports 12_1, while the GT 735M supports 11_0. The Quadro P1000 is positioned as a professional workstation card in the Quadro Pascal generation, with a successor in Quadro Volta, while the GT 735M is part of the GeForce 700M mobile series, succeeding the GeForce 600M and preceding the GeForce 800M.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner in raw performance: the NVIDIA Quadro P1000. Its OpenCL score is 275.7% higher than the GT 735M, and its memory bandwidth, compute units, and clock speeds are all superior. For any workload involving GPU compute, OpenCL, or professional rendering, the Quadro P1000 is the only viable choice based on the benchmark evidence.

The GT 735M, however, should not be dismissed entirely based on this single test. Its average benchmark score of 3,616 is actually higher than the Quadro P1000’s average of 3,163, which suggests that in aggregate, the GT 735M performs closer to its peers than the Quadro P1000 does. This could indicate that the Quadro P1000 has more variable performance across different benchmarks, with a particularly strong showing in OpenCL but weaker results in other suites. The GT 735M’s low TDP of 33 W and IGP form factor imply it was designed for energy-efficient mobile devices, where the Quadro P1000’s 47 W TDP and single-slot requirements would be impractical.

For a user requiring maximum compute performance in a professional context, the Quadro P1000 is the obvious pick. For a user with a legacy mobile platform needing basic graphics output and minimal power draw, the GT 735M remains a functional, if not fast, option. The benchmark results show that the Quadro P1000 is the superior GPU in every shared metric, but the GT 735M’s existence and benchmark profile remind us that performance is not the only consideration in GPU selection.