GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 and NVIDIA Quadro P600 are both end-of-life, single-slot graphics cards from NVIDIA, but they represent very different eras and market segments. The GT 740 is a 2014 Kepler-based consumer card, while the P600 is a 2017 Pascal-based professional card. Benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap between them, with the Quadro P600 winning both available head-to-head comparisons by significant margins, though the GT 740 holds a slight edge in overall percentile ranking.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data presents a stark picture of generational and architectural advantage. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Quadro P600 scores 11,181 points, while the GeForce GT 740 manages only 3,847 points. This translates to a delta of -65.6% for the GT 740, meaning the P600 is roughly 2.9 times faster in this compute-oriented workload. The margin is substantial and reflects not just clock speed differences but also the efficiency of the newer Pascal architecture at executing parallel tasks.

In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the results are similarly one-sided. The P600 posts a score of 9,755, against the GT 740's 4,083, yielding a delta of -58.1%. While the gap narrows slightly compared to OpenCL, the P600 still delivers more than double the performance. Vulkan is a low-overhead API that exposes the raw capabilities of the GPU, and the data indicates that the P600's architecture handles this workload with far greater efficiency. The GT 740's older Kepler design, with its lower fill rates and compute throughput, simply cannot keep pace.

The average benchmark scores further contextualize these head-to-head results. The GT 740 has an average benchmark score of 3,431 across its three tested workloads (Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan), while the P600 has an average of 2,923 across its nine tested workloads (including multiple Passmark tests). This is an interesting divergence: the P600 wins the two shared tests decisively, yet its overall average is pulled down by its inclusion of Passmark DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 tests, which score very low (56, 14, 24, and 14 respectively). The GT 740's average does not include any Passmark results, so a direct comparison of averages is misleading. The head-to-head tests are the more reliable indicator of relative performance where they overlap.

Examining the GT 740's individual scores, its Geekbench Metal result is 2,363, which is its lowest of the three. Its OpenCL score of 3,847 and Vulkan score of 4,083 are higher, suggesting the hardware is better suited to compute and modern graphics APIs than to Apple's Metal framework. The P600, lacking a Metal score, shows a different profile: its OpenCL result (11,181) is its strongest, followed by Vulkan (9,755). The P600's Passmark G3D score of 3,317 is also notably high, indicating strong legacy DirectX performance, while its G2D score of 529 points to competent 2D desktop acceleration.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the available data, the Quadro P600 is the clear winner in every shared benchmark category. There are zero wins for the GeForce GT 740 in the head-to-head comparisons. The P600 wins both the Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan tests. This makes the use-case split straightforward: for any application that leverages OpenCL or Vulkan, the P600 is the superior choice by a wide margin.

The GT 740's only advantage lies in its overall percentile ranking. It sits at the 21st percentile of all GPUs, whereas the P600 sits at the 19th percentile. This is a narrow difference and likely reflects the fact that the GT 740's average score is computed from a smaller, more consistent set of benchmarks, whereas the P600's average includes very low Passmark DirectX scores that drag its mean down. In practice, this percentile difference is negligible compared to the massive performance delta in the shared tests.

For professional workloads, the P600's strengths are evident. Its high OpenCL score suggests it can handle general-purpose GPU computing tasks, such as video encoding, scientific simulation, or financial modeling, with much greater ease than the GT 740. Its 4x mini-DisplayPort outputs also make it a better fit for multi-monitor professional setups. The GT 740, with its 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI outputs, is more oriented toward consumer use cases like basic desktop rendering or legacy display connectivity.

For gaming, the P600's superior Vulkan score indicates better performance in modern titles that use this API, while its Passmark G3D score of 3,317 suggests it can handle older DirectX 9/10/11 games reasonably well. The GT 740, with its lower raw scores, would struggle to maintain playable frame rates in demanding titles, even at lower resolutions and settings. The data does not support any scenario where the GT 740 outperforms the P600 in real-world graphics tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL compute workloads?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P600 is significantly faster, scoring 11,181 in Geekbench OpenCL versus the GT 740's 3,847, a delta of -65.6% for the older card.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Vulkan graphics performance?

A: The P600 again dominates, with a Geekbench Vulkan score of 9,755 versus the GT 740's 4,083, a -58.1% difference.

Q: Does the GT 740 have a higher average benchmark score than the P600?

A: Yes, the GT 740 has an average benchmark score of 3,431, while the P600's average is 2,923. However, this is because the P600's average includes very low Passmark DirectX scores that the GT 740's benchmark suite lacks.

Q: What is the percentile ranking difference between the two cards?

A: The GT 740 ranks at the 21st percentile of all GPUs, while the P600 ranks at the 19th percentile, making the GT 740 marginally higher in this metric.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The P600 has a much higher pixel rate of 24.91 GPixel/s, compared to the GT 740's 7.944 GPixel/s.

Q: Which card supports a more recent version of DirectX?

A: The P600 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GT 740 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), a lower feature level.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every core specification. The GT 740 uses the GK107 chip on a 28 nm process, while the P600 uses the GP107 chip on a 14 nm process. The GT 740 has 1,270 million transistors on a 118 mm² die, whereas the P600 packs 3,300 million transistors into a 132 mm² die. This results in a transistor density of 10.8M/mm² for the GT 740 and 25.0M/mm² for the P600.

Memory configurations diverge significantly. The GT 740 comes with 1,024 MB of GDDR5 memory, while the P600 offers 2 GB. Both use a 128-bit bus, but the GT 740 has higher memory bandwidth at 80.19 GB/s versus the P600's 64.13 GB/s. The GT 740 also has a faster effective memory speed of 5 Gbps, compared to 4 Gbps on the P600.

The compute units differ in composition. Both cards have 384 shading units and 16 ROPs, but the GT 740 has 32 TMUs while the P600 has 24. The GT 740's clock speeds are not listed, but the P600 has a base clock of 1,329 MHz and a boost clock of 1,557 MHz. The GT 740's memory clock is 1,253 MHz.

Power requirements are another differentiator. The GT 740 has a TDP of 64 W and requires a 1x 6-pin power connector, with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The P600 has a lower TDP of 40 W, requires no power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 200 W. Physically, the GT 740 is 145 mm long, while the P600 is 150 mm long and 69 mm tall.

Display outputs are completely different: the GT 740 offers 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.4a, while the P600 offers 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. The GT 740 has a launch MSRP of 89 USD, while the P600 has no listed launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is fundamental. The GT 740 is built on the Kepler architecture, while the P600 uses Pascal. This represents a generational leap in NVIDIA's GPU design. The GT 740's process node is 28 nm, fabricated by TSMC, while the P600 uses a more advanced 14 nm process from Samsung. This smaller node allows for significantly higher transistor density (25.0M/mm² vs 10.8M/mm²) and better power efficiency.

The chip designs reflect this. The GT 740's GK107 is a smaller, older chip with 1,270 million transistors, while the P600's GP107 is larger in die size (132 mm² vs 118 mm²) but contains over 2.5 times as many transistors. This allows the P600 to achieve much higher raw compute performance despite having the same number of shading units (384) and ROPs (16). The P600's FP32 performance is 1,195.8 GFLOPS, compared to the GT 740's 762.6 GFLOPS. The P600 also has a listed FP16 performance of 18.68 GFLOPS (1:64), while the GT 740 has no FP16 data.

The texture and pixel rates tell a similar story. The P600 achieves a texture rate of 37.37 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 24.91 GPixel/s, versus the GT 740's 31.78 GTexel/s and 7.944 GPixel/s. The pixel rate difference is particularly stark, indicating the P600's ROPs are far more efficient, likely due to the newer architecture's improved memory compression and rasterization techniques.

API support also differs. The GT 740 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The P600 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and a newer Vulkan 1.4. The DirectX 12 feature level difference (11_0 vs 12_1) means the P600 can access more advanced rendering features in modern games and applications. The P600's higher Vulkan version also indicates better support for recent extensions and optimizations.

Finally, the P600 is part of NVIDIA's Quadro Pascal professional lineup, with a "Quadro Pascal (Px000)" generation designation, while the GT 740 belongs to the consumer GeForce 700 series. This positioning explains the P600's focus on display outputs (4x mini-DisplayPort) for professional multi-monitor setups and its lower power consumption, which is typical for workstation cards designed for sustained, reliable operation in dense environments. The GT 740, with its legacy DVI and mini-HDMI outputs and higher TDP, is clearly aimed at consumer desktops of its era.