NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 vs NVIDIA Quadro 2000D Comparison

NVIDIA Quadro 2000D and NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 are two end-of-life graphics cards from different generations, aimed at different segments. The Quadro 2000D is a Fermi-based professional workstation card from 2011, while the GT 740 is a Kepler-based consumer card from 2014. Both share similar memory capacity and bus width, but their architectures, feature sets, and benchmark results reveal distinct strengths. This analysis uses recorded database measurements to break down where each card excels, how their architectures differ, and which user profile aligns with each product.

Where Each One Wins

The database records exactly one head-to-head benchmark between these two cards: Geekbench OpenCL. In that test, the Quadro 2000D scores 3930, while the GT 740 scores 3847. The Quadro 2000D wins with a 2.2% margin. So, in the only direct comparison available, the professional card is faster by a small but measurable amount.

But the GT 740 has a broader benchmark portfolio in the database. It has three recorded scores: Geekbench OpenCL at 3847, Geekbench Vulkan at 4083, and Geekbench Metal at 2363. The Quadro 2000D has only one recorded score: Geekbench OpenCL at 3930. This means the GT 740 is the only one of the two with any Vulkan or Metal support in the measurements. For any workload using Vulkan, the GT 740 shows a score of 4083, which is its best recorded result and far above its OpenCL score. The Quadro 2000D has no Vulkan or Metal scores at all, so the database offers no evidence it can perform in those APIs.

In terms of average benchmark score, the Quadro 2000D sits at 3930, which is its only score, while the GT 740 averages 3431 across all three tests. The GT 740’s average is dragged down by its low Metal score of 2363. If we look at OpenCL only, the Quadro 2000D leads by 2.2%. If we look at the entire recorded suite, the GT 740’s Vulkan score is the highest single result among both cards. Therefore, the Quadro 2000D wins the OpenCL compute race, while the GT 740 offers API diversity and a strong Vulkan showing.

The percentile rankings reinforce this split. The Quadro 2000D sits at the 23rd percentile among all GPUs, while the GT 740 is at the 21st percentile. That is a narrow gap, roughly 2 percentile points, which aligns with the 2.2% OpenCL delta. Neither card is a top performer, but the Quadro 2000D edges out the GT 740 in raw compute throughput, while the GT 740 provides more modern API support in the database.

Architecture Differences

These cards come from two different NVIDIA architectures. The Quadro 2000D uses the GF106 chip, based on the Fermi architecture, fabricated on a 40 nm process at TSMC. The GT 740 uses the GK107 chip, based on the Kepler architecture, also from TSMC but on a 28 nm process. The process node shrink from 40 nm to 28 nm is significant. The GT 740 packs 1,270 million transistors into a die size of 118 mm², giving a transistor density of 10.8M per mm². The Quadro 2000D has 1,170 million transistors on a much larger die of 238 mm², resulting in a density of 4.9M per mm². The GT 740 is more than twice as dense in transistor packing.

The compute resources differ substantially. The Quadro 2000D has 192 shading units, 32 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 render output units (ROPs). The GT 740 doubles the shading units to 384, keeps the same 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs. This doubling of shading units is a major architectural leap from Fermi to Kepler. The pixel rate tells the story: the Quadro 2000D achieves 5.000 GPixel/s, while the GT 740 reaches 7.944 GPixel/s. The texture rate also favors the GT 740, at 31.78 GTexel/s versus 20.00 GTexel/s for the Quadro 2000D. The FP32 compute performance, a key metric for general compute, is 480.0 GFLOPS on the Quadro and 762.6 GFLOPS on the GT 740. The GT 740 is roughly 59% higher in FP32.

Memory configurations are similar in capacity and bus width. Both use 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit interface. However, the memory clock differs. The Quadro 2000D runs memory at 650 MHz, yielding 2.6 Gbps effective, while the GT 740 runs at 1253 MHz, yielding 5 Gbps effective. This doubles the effective memory speed. The bandwidth reflects this: the Quadro 2000D provides 41.60 GB/s, while the GT 740 provides 80.19 GB/s. So the GT 740 has roughly 93% more memory bandwidth.

Power and physical specifications also differ. The Quadro 2000D has a TDP of 62 W and requires no power connectors, using the PCIe slot only. The GT 740 has a similar TDP of 64 W but requires a single 6-pin power connector. Both have a suggested PSU of 250 W. The bus interface differs: the Quadro 2000D uses PCIe 2.0 x16, while the GT 740 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs are limited on both, with the Quadro 2000D offering 2x DVI and the GT 740 offering 2x DVI plus 1x mini-HDMI 1.4a. The GT 740 has a shorter physical length at 145 mm versus 178 mm for the Quadro 2000D.

API support is another divergence. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6. But the GT 740 adds Vulkan 1.2.175 support, while the Quadro 2000D has no Vulkan support recorded. The GT 740 also has a Metal score in the database, which the Quadro 2000D lacks. This makes the GT 740 more flexible for modern API workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. The Quadro 2000D scores 3930, and the GT 740 scores 3847. The delta is 2.2% in favor of the Quadro 2000D. That is a narrow victory, but it is consistent. The Quadro 2000D’s higher FP32 rate of 480.0 GFLOPS, despite being lower than the GT 740’s 762.6 GFLOPS, does not explain this result. The OpenCL score may be influenced by driver maturity or workload characteristics. But the recorded data is unambiguous: the Quadro 2000D wins this test.

Looking at the GT 740’s other scores, its Vulkan result of 4083 is higher than the Quadro 2000D’s OpenCL score of 3930. However, those are different APIs, so direct comparison is not apples-to-apples. The GT 740’s Metal score of 2363 is much lower, indicating that API performance varies widely on this card. The GT 740’s average score of 3431 is lower than the Quadro 2000D’s 3930, but that average includes the weak Metal result.

Relative to the nearest rivals in the database, the Quadro 2000D sits close to NVIDIA Quadro K2000D, which scores 3919, a delta of 0.3% in favor of the Quadro 2000D. It also edges out the GeForce GT 745M (3953, delta -0.6%), the Radeon R5 M420 (3956, delta -0.7%), and the GeForce 830M (3957, delta -0.7%). The GT 740, meanwhile, is within 0.1% of the Quadro 2000M (3434), 1.2% ahead of the Intel HD Graphics P4600 (3389), 2.7% behind the GeForce 920MX (3528), and 3% ahead of the Intel HD Graphics 530 (3332). These positions show that both cards operate in the same performance tier, with the Quadro 2000D slightly higher in the OpenCL metric.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split. For pure OpenCL compute, the Quadro 2000D is the better choice, as it wins the only head-to-head test with a 2.2% margin. Its average score of 3930 is also higher than the GT 740’s average of 3431. If the workload is specifically OpenCL-based, the Quadro 2000D offers a slight but real edge.

For broader API support, the GT 740 dominates. It is the only card with a Vulkan score (4083) or a Metal score (2363) in the database. The GT 740 also doubles memory bandwidth (80.19 GB/s vs 41.60 GB/s) and has nearly double the FP32 performance (762.6 GFLOPS vs 480.0 GFLOPS). The GT 740’s Kepler architecture on a 28 nm process is more modern, with higher transistor density (10.8M / mm² vs 4.9M / mm²) and a smaller die (118 mm² vs 238 mm²). It also supports PCIe 3.0 and Vulkan 1.2.175, neither of which the Quadro 2000D has.

The launch MSRP of the Quadro 2000D was 599 USD, while the GT 740 launched at 89 USD, but pricing is not part of this analysis. From a pure performance standpoint, the GT 740 offers superior compute throughput and memory bandwidth, plus modern API coverage, even though it loses the OpenCL head-to-head by 2.2%. The Quadro 2000D wins that one test and has a higher single benchmark average, but it lacks Vulkan and Metal results entirely.

For a user with OpenCL-only software, the Quadro 2000D is the safer pick based on the recorded win. For any workload that leverages Vulkan, the GT 740 is the only option with a recorded score. The GT 740 also has a higher pixel rate (7.944 GPixel/s vs 5.000 GPixel/s) and texture rate (31.78 GTexel/s vs 20.00 GTexel/s), which suggests better rasterization throughput. The data does not show a single winner across all metrics; it shows a trade-off between compute consistency (Quadro 2000D) and modern feature coverage (GT 740).

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 2000D scores 3930 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 scores 3847. The Quadro 2000D wins by 2.2%.

Q: Does the GT 740 support Vulkan?

A: Yes, the GT 740 has a recorded Geekbench Vulkan score of 4083. The Quadro 2000D has no Vulkan score in the database.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Quadro 2000D has a memory bandwidth of 41.60 GB/s, while the GT 740 has a bandwidth of 80.19 GB/s. The GT 740 provides roughly double the bandwidth.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The GT 740 has 384 shading units, while the Quadro 2000D has 192 shading units. The GT 740 doubles the shading unit count.

Q: What are the FP32 compute figures?

A: The Quadro 2000D achieves 480.0 GFLOPS FP32, while the GT 740 achieves 762.6 GFLOPS FP32. The GT 740 is higher by about 59%.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No, both are end-of-life. The Quadro 2000D was released on 2011-10-04, and the GT 740 was released on 2014-05-28.