NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 vs NVIDIA RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 occupy opposite ends of the GPU spectrum, separated by nearly a decade of architecture evolution. The data shows a stark contrast in compute capability, memory subsystem, and feature support, yet both cards share a 21st percentile ranking among all GPUs, indicating that their benchmark scores, while achieved through entirely different means, land them in a similar performance tier relative to the entire database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons are not available in the data, so the analysis relies on the average benchmark scores and nearest rival deltas for each card. The RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation has a single benchmark entry: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3596. The GT 740, conversely, has three Geekbench entries, with scores of 2363 in Metal, 3847 in OpenCL, and 4083 in Vulkan. Its average benchmark score across these tests is 3431.

The RTX 5000 Mobile’s average score of 3596 places it 0.1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 545, which scores 3594, and 0.6% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GT 735M, which scores 3616. It also trails the GeForce GTX 1050 by 0.9% (3629) and the AMD Radeon HD 6770 by 1.5% (3649). This suggests that, despite its modern architecture and massive compute resources, the RTX 5000 Mobile’s benchmark result sits in a cluster of older, much less powerful cards. The GT 740’s average score of 3431 is 0.1% behind the NVIDIA Quadro 2000M (3434), 1.2% ahead of the Intel HD Graphics P4600 (3389), 2.7% behind the NVIDIA GeForce 920MX (3528), and 3% ahead of the Intel HD Graphics 530 (3332).

The raw difference between the two cards’ average scores is 165 points, favoring the RTX 5000 Mobile by roughly 4.8%. This margin is small in absolute terms, but the context is critical. The RTX 5000 Mobile’s score comes from a single, modern DirectX 12 test, while the GT 740’s average is derived from three legacy Geekbench compute tests. The RTX 5000 Mobile’s 41.15 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is orders of magnitude higher than the GT 740’s 762.6 GFLOPS, yet the benchmark averages show them within striking distance. This indicates that the Steel Nomad test is likely not stressing the RTX 5000 Mobile’s compute capabilities in a way that reflects its theoretical throughput, or that the test is heavily bound by other factors such as driver overhead or thermal constraints in a mobile form factor.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is immense. The RTX 5000 Mobile is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture using the AD103 chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It integrates 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 121.1 million per mm². The GT 740 uses the Kepler architecture with the GK107 chip, manufactured on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains only 1,270 million transistors on a 118 mm² die, with a density of 10.8 million per mm². This represents a 36-fold increase in transistor count and an 11-fold increase in density for the newer card.

The compute resources are similarly divergent. The RTX 5000 Mobile has 9,728 shading units, 304 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, along with 76 dedicated ray tracing cores and 304 tensor cores. The GT 740 has 384 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with no ray tracing or tensor core support whatsoever. The pixel rate of the RTX 5000 Mobile is 236.9 GPixel/s versus 7.944 GPixel/s for the GT 740, a 30-fold difference. Texture rate is 643.0 GTexel/s versus 31.78 GTexel/s, a 20-fold difference. FP32 compute is 41.15 TFLOPS versus 762.6 GFLOPS, a 54-fold difference. The RTX 5000 Mobile also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, while the GT 740 has no listed FP16 capability.

Memory is another major differentiator. The RTX 5000 Mobile uses 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GT 740 uses 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, providing 80.19 GB/s. The newer card has 16 times the memory capacity and over 7 times the bandwidth. The process node difference from 28 nm to 5 nm also impacts power efficiency and thermal characteristics, though the TDP figures show the RTX 5000 Mobile at 120 W versus the GT 740’s 64 W, meaning the newer card draws more power while delivering vastly more performance per watt.

The Verdict

According to the data, the RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation is the superior processor in every measurable specification except for the benchmark average, where it holds a slim 4.8% lead. Its compute throughput, memory bandwidth, and feature set are all dramatically higher. The 21st percentile ranking for both cards, however, suggests that in the context of all GPUs in the database, neither card is a high performer by modern standards. The RTX 5000 Mobile’s single benchmark score of 3596 is its only data point, and it is comparable to the GT 740’s average of 3431, which is itself an average of three different tests.

The data indicates that the RTX 5000 Mobile is a professional mobile workstation part, designed for tasks that leverage its tensor cores and ray tracing capabilities, which the GT 740 completely lacks. The GT 740, being end-of-life and released in 2014, is a legacy desktop card that was once a budget option. Its 145 mm length and single-slot design with a 1x 6-pin power connector reflect its older, simpler construction. The RTX 5000 Mobile is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors, designed to be soldered onto a motherboard.

For a user choosing between these two, the RTX 5000 Mobile is the only logical choice for any modern workload. The GT 740 cannot run DirectX 12 Ultimate (it supports only DirectX 12 (11_0)), and it has no Vulkan 1.4 support, topping out at Vulkan 1.2.175. The RTX 5000 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4. The production status also differs: the RTX 5000 Mobile is active, while the GT 740 is end-of-life. The data strongly suggests that the RTX 5000 Mobile is the more capable and future-proof part.

FAQ

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare between the two GPUs?

A: The RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation has an average benchmark score of 3596, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 has an average score of 3431, giving the RTX 5000 Mobile a lead of 165 points, or approximately 4.8%.

Q: What is the transistor count difference?

A: The RTX 5000 Mobile has 45,900 million transistors, whereas the GT 740 has 1,270 million transistors, a difference of over 36 times in favor of the RTX 5000 Mobile.

Q: Does the GT 740 support ray tracing?

A: No, the GT 740 has no listed ray tracing cores, while the RTX 5000 Mobile has 76 dedicated RT cores.

Q: What are the memory capacities of each card?

A: The RTX 5000 Mobile has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the GT 740 has 1024 MB (1 GB) of GDDR5 memory.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation is listed as "Active" in production, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 is marked as "End-of-life."

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The RTX 5000 Mobile achieves 41.15 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, compared to the GT 740’s 762.6 GFLOPS, making the RTX 5000 Mobile over 50 times faster in raw FP32 throughput.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5000 Mobile wins decisively in every raw performance metric listed. Its pixel rate of 236.9 GPixel/s versus 7.944 GPixel/s means it can fill frames over 29 times faster. Its texture rate of 643.0 GTexel/s versus 31.78 GTexel/s is over 20 times higher. Its memory bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s versus 80.19 GB/s is over 7 times higher. It also wins on architecture features, supporting ray tracing, tensor cores, and FP16 compute at a 1:1 ratio, none of which the GT 740 offers. The RTX 5000 Mobile also has a more recent release date (2023 vs 2014) and a smaller process node (5 nm vs 28 nm).

The GT 740 wins in a few narrow areas. It has a lower TDP at 64 W versus 120 W, meaning it consumes less power. It also has a higher Vulkan benchmark score in the Geekbench test, scoring 4083, though this is a single test and not directly comparable to the RTX 5000 Mobile’s Steel Nomad result. The GT 740 also has a longer list of benchmark entries (three versus one), providing more data points for its average. In terms of physical design, the GT 740 is a single-slot card with a 145 mm length and a 1x 6-pin power connector, while the RTX 5000 Mobile is an IGP with no power connectors and a slot width of "IGP," meaning it is not a discrete card at all.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every specification field. The process node is 5 nm for the RTX 5000 Mobile and 28 nm for the GT 740. The transistor count is 45,900 million versus 1,270 million. The die size is 379 mm² versus 118 mm². The RTX 5000 Mobile has a base clock of 1425 MHz and a boost clock of 2115 MHz, while the GT 740 has no listed base or boost clocks. Memory clocks are 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for the RTX 5000 Mobile and 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) for the GT 740.

The memory configuration differs completely: 16 GB GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus versus 1024 MB GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. The RTX 5000 Mobile has 9,728 shading units, 304 TMUs, 112 ROPs, 76 RT cores, and 304 tensor cores. The GT 740 has 384 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with no RT or tensor cores. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 for the RTX 5000 Mobile and PCIe 3.0 x16 for the GT 740. The TDP is 120 W versus 64 W. The GT 740 has a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the RTX 5000 Mobile has no suggested PSU listed.

The display outputs differ as well: the RTX 5000 Mobile is "Portable Device Dependent," meaning its outputs vary by laptop implementation, while the GT 740 has 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.4a. The GT 740 has a launch MSRP of 89 USD, which can be stated once as a historical fact. The release dates are 2023-03-20 for the RTX 5000 Mobile and 2014-05-28 for the GT 740. The GT 740’s predecessor is the GeForce 600 series and successor is the GeForce 900 series, while the RTX 5000 Mobile’s predecessor is Ampere-MW and successor is Blackwell-MW. The GT 740 is end-of-life, while the RTX 5000 Mobile remains active in production.