GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro 2000M and NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 are near-identical in average benchmark performance, separated by a razor-thin 0.1% margin. However, the data reveals a clear split in workload suitability, with the GT 740 taking the sole head-to-head benchmark win while the Quadro 2000M’s edge is purely statistical. The GeForce GT 740 is decisively the stronger compute performer in the one available comparison, while the Quadro 2000M’s advantage exists only in the aggregate average score, not in any direct test.

Where Each One Wins

The GeForce GT 740 wins the only direct head-to-head benchmark available: Geekbench OpenCL. In that test, the GT 740 scores 3847 against the Quadro 2000M’s 3434, a 10.7% advantage. This is a substantial margin for a single benchmark, indicating that the GT 740 has a meaningful edge in general-purpose compute workloads that leverage OpenCL. The Quadro 2000M does not win any head-to-head benchmark in the data set, so its claim to relevance rests entirely on its average benchmark score of 3434, which edges out the GT 740’s average of 3431 by a negligible 0.1%. This means the Quadro 2000M’s "win" is effectively a rounding error across aggregated results, not a repeatable performance advantage.

Looking at the broader rival landscape, both GPUs sit at the 21st percentile among all GPUs, meaning they are in the lower tier of performance overall. The GeForce 920MX scores 3528, which is 2.7% higher than both cards, while the Intel HD Graphics 530 (3332) and Intel HD Graphics P4600 (3389) trail by 3.1% and 1.3% respectively. Neither the Quadro 2000M nor the GT 740 can claim a dominant position even within their immediate peer group. The GT 740’s win in OpenCL is the only decisive performance differentiator, while the Quadro 2000M’s edge is purely cosmetic.

The Verdict

Pick the GeForce GT 740 for any application that relies on OpenCL compute performance. The data shows a clear 10.7% lead in the sole head-to-head test, which is a significant gap for two otherwise evenly matched cards. The GT 740 also offers a broader benchmark profile with additional Metal and Vulkan scores, indicating it can be evaluated across more modern API workloads. The Quadro 2000M, by contrast, has only a single OpenCL score and no wins in any benchmark. Its average score is 0.1% higher, but that margin is within noise and does not translate into any direct performance victory.

The Quadro 2000M is the choice only if the specific requirement is a mobile MXM form factor or legacy Quadro branding, as it uses an MXM-A (3.0) bus interface and is described as an MXM Module. The GT 740 is a single-slot desktop card with a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface. For raw compute, the GT 740 is the verdict; for a portable, embedded-style solution where the MXM form factor is mandatory, the Quadro 2000M exists as the only option in this pairing. There is no scenario in the data where the Quadro 2000M wins on performance.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL, and it is a decisive win for the GeForce GT 740. The GT 740 posts a score of 3847, while the Quadro 2000M trails at 3434. This is a delta of 10.7%, meaning the GT 740 is roughly a tenth faster in this workload. To put that in context, the GT 740’s lead over the Quadro 2000M is more than three times larger than the Quadro 2000M’s entire lead over the Intel HD Graphics P4600, which is just 1.3%. This is not a marginal difference; it is a solid, repeatable advantage for the GT 740.

The Quadro 2000M does not win any head-to-head benchmark, so there is no countervailing data point. Its average benchmark score of 3434 is 0.1% higher than the GT 740’s 3431, but this aggregate figure includes only the OpenCL test for the Quadro 2000M, while the GT 740’s average pulls from three separate tests (OpenCL, Metal, and Vulkan). The GT 740’s Vulkan score of 4083 and Metal score of 2363 indicate that its OpenCL result is not an outlier; it performs consistently across modern APIs. The Quadro 2000M has no such breadth, so its average is based on a single data point, making the 0.1% aggregate edge statistically meaningless.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 scores 3847, which is 10.7% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro 2000M’s 3434.

Q: How close are the two GPUs in average benchmark score?

A: The Quadro 2000M averages 3434, and the GT 740 averages 3431, a difference of only 0.1% in favor of the Quadro 2000M.

Q: Does the Quadro 2000M win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. The data shows zero wins for the Quadro 2000M, while the GT 740 wins the single available head-to-head test.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The Quadro 2000M has 2 GB of DDR3 memory with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth, while the GT 740 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory with 80.19 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do these cards compare to the GeForce 920MX?

A: The GeForce 920MX averages 3528, which is 2.7% higher than both the Quadro 2000M and the GT 740.

Q: What is the form factor difference?

A: The Quadro 2000M is an MXM Module (MXM-A 3.0 bus interface), while the GT 740 is a Single-slot card measuring 145 mm (5.7 inches) with a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different NVIDIA architectures and process nodes. The Quadro 2000M uses the GF106 chip built on Fermi architecture, fabricated on a 40 nm process at TSMC. It packs 1,170 million transistors on a 238 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 4.9 million transistors per mm². The GT 740, in contrast, uses the GK107 chip on Kepler architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains 1,270 million transistors on a much smaller 118 mm² die, giving it a transistor density of 10.8 million per mm², more than double the Quadro 2000M’s density.

The compute resources differ sharply. The Quadro 2000M has 192 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The GT 740 doubles the shading units to 384, while keeping the same 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs. This doubling of shading units explains why the GT 740 achieves 762.6 GFLOPS of FP32 performance versus the Quadro 2000M’s 422.4 GFLOPS. The pixel rate also favors the GT 740 at 7.944 GPixel/s versus 4.400 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 31.78 GTexel/s versus 17.60 GTexel/s. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but the GT 740 adds Vulkan 1.2.175 support, which the Quadro 2000M lacks entirely.

Specification Differences

The memory subsystems are a major differentiator. The Quadro 2000M offers 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, with memory clocked at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) and bandwidth of 28.80 GB/s. The GT 740 ships with 1024 MB of GDDR5 on the same 128-bit bus, but its memory runs at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective), delivering 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth, nearly triple the Quadro 2000M’s throughput. This bandwidth advantage is critical for compute workloads, as the GT 740 can feed its doubled shading units far more effectively.

Power and physical specifications also diverge. The Quadro 2000M is rated at 55 W TDP and requires no power connectors, fitting into an MXM-A (3.0) slot. The GT 740 has a 64 W TDP, requires a single 6-pin power connector, and has a suggested PSU of 250 W. The GT 740 is a single-slot card measuring 145 mm (5.7 inches) in length, while the Quadro 2000M’s dimensions are not listed and its display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent." The GT 740 offers 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.4a outputs. The Quadro 2000M launched on 2011-01-12 as part of the Quadro Fermi-M generation, succeeding the Quadro FX Mobile and preceding the Quadro Kepler-M. The GT 740 launched on 2014-05-28 in the GeForce 700 generation, succeeding the GeForce 600 and preceding the GeForce 900. The GT 740 has a listed launch MSRP of 89 USD; the Quadro 2000M has no listed MSRP. Both are end-of-life products, and both sit at the 21st percentile among all GPUs in the database.