GPU Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a surprisingly close contest between two GPUs from different NVIDIA generations and market segments. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 edges out the Quadro 3000M in the single shared benchmark, the Geekbench OpenCL test, scoring 3847 against 3718, a delta of 3.4% in favor of the GT 740. However, the Quadro 3000M’s average benchmark score of 3718 places it at the 22nd percentile of all GPUs, while the GT 740’s average of 3431 sits at the 21st percentile, meaning the two occupy nearly identical positions in the overall performance distribution.

For users prioritizing raw compute throughput in OpenCL workloads, the GT 740 is the marginally faster option, delivering roughly 3.4% higher performance. Yet the Quadro 3000M is a mobile MXM module designed for professional laptops, whereas the GT 740 is a single-slot desktop card with a 145 mm length. The GT 740 offers a broader API feature set, including Vulkan 1.2.175 support, which the Quadro 3000M lacks entirely. The GT 740 also supports the Geekbench Metal test, scoring 2363, and the Vulkan test, scoring 4083, providing versatility across different compute frameworks. The Quadro 3000M’s sole benchmark is OpenCL, so its capabilities in other APIs remain unmeasured in this data.

The GT 740 is the clear choice for desktop users needing a compact, low-TDP card with modern API support and slightly higher OpenCL performance. The Quadro 3000M, meanwhile, is the only option for portable workstation form factors, given its MXM-B (3.0) bus interface and portable-device-dependent display outputs. Neither card offers a decisive performance advantage; the selection should hinge on form factor and API requirements rather than raw speed.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent distinct architectural eras from NVIDIA. The Quadro 3000M is built on the Fermi architecture using the GF104 chip, fabricated on TSMC’s 40 nm process. The GT 740 employs the Kepler architecture with the GK107 chip, manufactured on a more advanced 28 nm process. This process shrink allows the GT 740 to pack 1,270 million transistors into a 118 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 10.8M per mm². The Quadro 3000M, by contrast, contains 1,950 million transistors across a much larger 332 mm² die, yielding a lower density of 5.9M per mm². The GT 740’s newer process node enables nearly double the transistor density despite having fewer total transistors.

The shading resources differ substantially. The GT 740 carries 384 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The Quadro 3000M has 240 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The GT 740 therefore has 60% more shading units, while the Quadro 3000M has 25% more TMUs and double the ROP count. This configuration suggests the Quadro 3000M may excel in pixel-heavy workloads, while the GT 740 favors compute-heavy tasks.

Memory configurations diverge on capacity and bus width. The Quadro 3000M offers 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 80.00 GB/s. The GT 740 has 1024 MB (1 GB) of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, with bandwidth of 80.19 GB/s. Despite the GT 740 having half the memory bus width, its higher memory clock of 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) versus the Quadro’s 625 MHz (2.5 Gbps effective) results in nearly identical bandwidth, a difference of only 0.19 GB/s.

The GT 740 supports a wider range of APIs. Both cards support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but the GT 740 additionally supports Vulkan 1.2.175, while the Quadro 3000M has no Vulkan support listed. The GT 740 also has a Geekbench Metal score, indicating macOS Metal compatibility, which the Quadro lacks in this data. Power characteristics differ as well: the GT 740 draws 64 W TDP with a 250 W suggested PSU and a single 6-pin power connector, while the Quadro 3000M consumes 75 W with no power connectors required, relying on the MXM slot.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 scores 3847 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 3.4% higher than the Quadro 3000M’s score of 3718. This makes the GT 740 the winner in the only head-to-head benchmark available.

Q: Do these GPUs support the same APIs?

A: No. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but the GT 740 also supports Vulkan 1.2.175 and has a Geekbench Metal score of 2363. The Quadro 3000M has no Vulkan support and no Metal benchmark listed.

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The two are effectively tied. The Quadro 3000M achieves 80.00 GB/s over a 256-bit bus with 2.5 Gbps effective memory speed, while the GT 740 achieves 80.19 GB/s over a 128-bit bus with 5 Gbps effective memory speed.

Q: Which card has more memory capacity?

A: The Quadro 3000M has 2 GB of GDDR5, double the GT 740’s 1024 MB. However, the GT 740’s higher memory clock compensates for its narrower bus, resulting in near-identical bandwidth.

Q: What are the form factor differences?

A: The Quadro 3000M is an MXM Module using the MXM-B (3.0) interface, with display outputs described as portable-device dependent. The GT 740 is a single-slot PCIe 3.0 x16 card measuring 145 mm (5.7 inches) in length, with 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.4a outputs.

Q: Which GPU draws more power?

A: The Quadro 3000M has a 75 W TDP, while the GT 740 has a lower 64 W TDP. The GT 740 requires a 250 W suggested PSU and one 6-pin power connector, whereas the Quadro needs no additional power connectors.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro 3000M | NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 |

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

| Architecture | Fermi | Kepler |

| Chip | GF104 | GK107 |

| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 1,950 million | 1,270 million |

| Die Size | 332 mm² | 118 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 5.9M / mm² | 10.8M / mm² |

| Memory Clock | 625 MHz (2.5 Gbps effective) | 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 80.00 GB/s | 80.19 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 240 | 384 |

| TMUs | 40 | 32 |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 4.500 GPixel/s | 7.944 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 18.00 GTexel/s | 31.78 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 432.0 GFLOPS | 762.6 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 75 W | 64 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | N/A | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.4a |

| Vulkan Support | N/A | 1.2.175 |

| Dimensions | N/A | 145 mm (5.7 inches) |

| Release Date | 2011-02-21 | 2014-05-28 |

| Launch MSRP | N/A | 89 USD |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the GeForce GT 740 wins with a score of 3847 against the Quadro 3000M’s 3718, a delta of 3.4%. This margin is modest but consistent with the GT 740’s architectural advantages: it carries 384 shading units versus 240, and its FP32 throughput is 762.6 GFLOPS compared to 432.0 GFLOPS, a 76.5% advantage in raw floating-point capacity. The GT 740’s pixel rate of 7.944 GPixel/s is also notably higher than the Quadro’s 4.500 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 31.78 GTexel/s exceeds the Quadro’s 18.00 GTexel/s by a substantial margin.

The Quadro 3000M, however, is not without its strengths. Its ROP count of 32 doubles the GT 740’s 16, and its 256-bit memory bus offers twice the width, though the effective bandwidth is nearly identical. The Quadro’s 2 GB memory capacity is double the GT 740’s 1 GB, which could benefit workloads requiring larger datasets. The Quadro’s nearest rival, the GeForce GT 740M, scores 3717, a 0% delta, while the GT 740’s closest competitor, the Quadro 2000M, scores 3434, placing the GT 740 0.1% behind it.

In terms of overall standing, the Quadro 3000M’s average benchmark score of 3718 places it at the 22nd percentile of all GPUs, just one percentile above the GT 740’s 21st percentile with an average of 3431. This discrepancy between the GT 740’s higher OpenCL score (3847) and lower average score (3431) suggests that its Metal and Vulkan scores are significantly lower, pulling down its overall average. Indeed, the GT 740’s Metal score of 2363 is far below its OpenCL score, indicating that its compute performance varies substantially across different APIs.

The GT 740’s Vulkan score of 4083 is its strongest result, surpassing its OpenCL performance by 6.1%. This positions the GT 740 as a more versatile compute device for modern graphics APIs, while the Quadro 3000M’s performance is only characterized in OpenCL. For users targeting Vulkan workloads, the GT 740’s 4083 score represents a capability the Quadro cannot match, as the Quadro has no Vulkan support at all. The combination of higher OpenCL performance, Metal support, and Vulkan support makes the GT 740 the more broadly capable GPU in software terms, even though the raw performance gap over the Quadro is narrow.