NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M are both Kepler-based mobile graphics solutions from the GeForce 700M generation, aimed at the mainstream laptop segment during their 2013 release window. While they share the same core count and architecture lineage, the data reveals distinct performance tiers, memory configurations, and power characteristics that define their respective positions. According to the benchmark database, the GT 755M holds a commanding lead in average benchmark score (4033 vs. 3717) and a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs (24th vs. 22nd percentile), indicating it is the stronger of the two parts overall.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a single direct head-to-head comparison between these two mobile GPUs. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M scores 4934 points, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M trails with 3974 points. This translates to a 24.2% performance advantage for the GT 755M, a substantial margin that underscores the computational gap between the two parts in raw compute workloads.

This OpenCL result is the only shared benchmark between the two cards, but it is highly indicative of their relative capabilities. The GT 755M’s victory in this test is not marginal; it represents a significant lead that will manifest in any OpenCL-accelerated application, from video encoding to GPU-accelerated productivity tools. The data shows the GT 755M is unequivocally the faster card in this compute-oriented scenario.

Interestingly, the GT 740M has a benchmark result in Geekbench Vulkan (score: 3459) that has no corresponding entry for the GT 755M in the database. While this prevents a direct comparison, it does show that the GT 740M is capable of Vulkan workloads, even if its OpenCL performance suggests it would likely lose a hypothetical Vulkan matchup given the GT 755M’s superior raw compute power.

The GT 755M’s advantage is also reflected in its overall average benchmark score of 4033, which is 8.5% higher than the GT 740M’s average of 3717. This difference, while smaller than the OpenCL delta, still places the GT 755M in a higher performance class. The GT 755M’s win count stands at 1 in head-to-head tests, with the GT 740M recording 0 wins, further solidifying the performance hierarchy.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the benchmark data, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M wins in the only directly comparable benchmark (OpenCL), making it the clear choice for compute-heavy tasks. Its 24.2% lead in OpenCL suggests it is significantly better suited for applications that leverage general-purpose GPU computing, such as 3D rendering, video processing, and scientific simulations. Users seeking a mobile GPU for these workloads will find the GT 755M substantially more capable.

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M, while losing the OpenCL contest, does not have a clear win in any directly comparable test. However, its lower TDP of 33 W compared to the GT 755M’s 50 W is a qualitative advantage in thermally constrained laptops. The data shows the GT 740M consumes significantly less power, which could translate to longer battery life and quieter operation in thin-and-light chassis, even though the benchmark scores do not favor it. Its Vulkan result of 3459 indicates it can handle modern graphics APIs, but its performance ceiling is lower.

For gaming and general graphics workloads, the GT 755M’s higher memory bandwidth of 86.40 GB/s (vs. 14.40 GB/s for the GT 740M) is a critical differentiator. The GT 755M uses GDDR5 memory, while the GT 740M uses DDR3, and this bandwidth disparity is likely a major contributor to the GT 755M’s superior performance in texture-heavy and resolution-intensive tasks, even if specific gaming benchmarks are not present in the data.

Architecture Differences

Despite both being fabricated on TSMC’s 28 nm process, the two GPUs are built on different chips with distinct internal configurations. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M is based on the GK107 chip, while the GT 740M uses the GK208 chip. This fundamental difference leads to several key architectural variations.

The GT 755M’s GK107 chip contains 1,270 million transistors on a 118 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 10.8M / mm². In contrast, the GT 740M’s GK208 chip is smaller, with 1,020 million transistors on an 87 mm² die, achieving a slightly higher density of 11.7M / mm². The GT 755M’s larger die and higher transistor count suggest a more complex and capable GPU core.

Both cards feature 384 shading units and 32 texture mapping units (TMUs), indicating identical compute and texture-processing capacity on paper. However, they differ in render output units (ROPs): the GT 755M has 16 ROPs, while the GT 740M has only 8. This doubling of ROPs on the GT 755M is a significant advantage for pixel-heavy workloads, such as high-resolution rendering and anti-aliasing, and helps explain its superior performance despite similar core counts.

The memory subsystems are starkly different. The GT 755M utilizes 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 86.40 GB/s. The GT 740M also has 2 GB of memory, but it is DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, capping bandwidth at just 14.40 GB/s. This is a 6x difference in memory bandwidth, a massive gap that likely dominates real-world performance in memory-bound scenarios. The GT 755M’s memory clock is 1350 MHz (5.4 Gbps effective), while the GT 740M runs at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective).

Clock speeds are similar, with the GT 755M running at 980 MHz base and 1020 MHz boost, and the GT 740M at 980 MHz base and 1033 MHz boost. The GT 740M actually has a slightly higher boost clock, but this does not compensate for its memory and ROP deficits. Pixel rates are nearly identical (8.160 GPixel/s for the GT 755M vs. 8.264 GPixel/s for the GT 740M), but texture rates slightly favor the GT 740M (33.06 GTexel/s vs. 32.64 GTexel/s). FP32 performance is also close, with the GT 740M marginally ahead at 793.3 GFLOPS vs. 783.4 GFLOPS for the GT 755M.

The GT 740M is designated as Kepler 2.0 architecture, while the GT 755M is simply Kepler. Both support the same APIs, including DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. Power consumption differs notably: the GT 755M has a TDP of 50 W, while the GT 740M is rated at 33 W. The bus interface also differs, with the GT 755M using PCIe 3.0 x16 and the GT 740M using PCIe 3.0 x8.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute workloads?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M is significantly faster, scoring 4934 in Geekbench OpenCL compared to the GT 740M’s 3974, a 24.2% advantage.

Q: Do both GPUs have the same number of shading units?

A: Yes, both the GT 755M and GT 740M feature 384 shading units and 32 texture mapping units, but the GT 755M has double the ROPs (16 vs. 8).

Q: What is the key difference in memory configuration?

A: The GT 755M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 86.40 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the GT 740M uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with only 14.40 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU consumes less power?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M has a lower TDP of 33 W, compared to the GT 755M’s 50 W, making it more suitable for power-constrained laptops.

Q: Are they based on the same chip?

A: No, the GT 755M uses the GK107 chip, while the GT 740M uses the GK208 chip. Both are on a 28 nm process, but the GK107 is larger with 1,270 million transistors vs. 1,020 million.

Q: What is the launch date of each GPU?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M was released on 2013-06-19, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M followed on 2013-06-24.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear hierarchy: the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M is the superior performer. Its 24.2% lead in the OpenCL head-to-head, combined with its higher average score (4033 vs. 3717) and better percentile ranking (24th vs. 22nd), makes it the definitive choice for users prioritizing raw compute power and graphics performance. The GT 755M’s use of GDDR5 memory with 86.40 GB/s bandwidth, double the ROP count, and a wider 128-bit bus are the architectural pillars of this advantage, directly impacting frame rates and rendering fidelity in demanding applications.

Conversely, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M, while less powerful, occupies a distinct niche based on efficiency. Its 33 W TDP is significantly lower than the GT 755M’s 50 W, making it the preferable option for ultra-portable laptops where battery life and thermal management are paramount. In tasks that are not memory-bound, such as simple 2D acceleration or light productivity, the GT 740M’s similar clock speeds and core counts (both have 384 shaders) mean it can hold its own, as evidenced by its comparable FP32 output (793.3 GFLOPS vs. 783.4 GFLOPS).

Users who need a mobile GPU for gaming, video editing, or GPU-accelerated compute should select the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M without hesitation. The data shows it is decisively faster in the only directly comparable test. Users who require a low-power solution for basic tasks and extended battery life, and who are willing to sacrifice significant performance, may find the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M acceptable. Ultimately, the choice is between the GT 755M’s brute-force performance and the GT 740M’s energy efficiency, with the benchmark results strongly favoring the former in any performance-critical scenario.