NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Comparison

The GeForce GT 740M and GeForce GTX 1050 represent two distinct eras of NVIDIA mobile graphics, separated by a generational leap in architecture and manufacturing. The benchmark data reveals a decisive performance gap, with the GTX 1050 dominating in every head-to-head comparison, yet the GT 740M holds its own as a legacy part with a surprisingly close average score in the broader database. This analysis breaks down the numbers to understand not just how much faster the GTX 1050 is, but why the architectural shifts matter so profoundly.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct comparisons available are stark and unambiguous. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GeForce GTX 1050 scores 15,233, while the GeForce GT 740M manages 3,974. This represents a delta of -73.9% for the older card, meaning the GTX 1050 delivers nearly four times the raw compute throughput in this workload. The margin is so wide that it suggests a fundamental difference in capability rather than a mere clock speed advantage.

The Vulkan test tells a similar story, though with a slightly narrower gap. The GTX 1050 posts 8,995 points against the GT 740M’s 3,459, a delta of -61.5%. While still a crushing defeat for the GT 740M, the smaller percentage difference in Vulkan compared to OpenCL hints that API overhead or driver optimization may partially mitigate the hardware disparity in certain scenarios. Still, the GTX 1050 wins both head-to-head tests, securing 2 wins to 0.

Looking at the broader benchmark landscape, the GT 740M’s average benchmark score is 3,717, which is actually higher than the GTX 1050’s average of 3,629. This apparent contradiction is explained by the benchmark suites used. The GT 740M only has two Geekbench results, while the GTX 1050 has a much wider array of tests, including several low-scoring Passmark entries that drag its average down. The GTX 1050’s Passmark G3D score of 5,028 and GPU Compute score of 2,091 are strong, but its Passmark DirectX 9 score of 83 and DirectX 10 score of 24 weigh heavily on the average. This illustrates that a single average figure can be misleading without context on the workload distribution.

Architecture Differences

The core architectural divide is a generational shift from Kepler 2.0 to Pascal. The GT 740M is built on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 87 mm² housing 1,020 million transistors. The GTX 1050, in contrast, uses Samsung’s 14 nm process, packing 3,300 million transistors into a 132 mm² die. This is a transistor density increase from 11.7M per mm² to 25.0M per mm², a doubling that enables the GTX 1050 to fit more than three times the transistors in only 1.5 times the silicon area.

The memory subsystems are night and day. The GT 740M uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of just 14.40 GB/s. The GTX 1050 also has 2 GB, but it is GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 112.1 GB/s — an almost eightfold increase in memory bandwidth. This is critical for fill-rate-bound workloads and modern game assets that demand rapid texture streaming.

Compute resources scale accordingly. The GT 740M has 384 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The GTX 1050 more than doubles the shader count to 640, increases TMUs to 40, and quadruples ROPs to 32. The pixel rate jumps from 8.264 GPixel/s to 46.56 GPixel/s, and texture rate from 33.06 GTexel/s to 58.20 GTexel/s. FP32 performance leaps from 793.3 GFLOPS to 1.862 TFLOPS. The GTX 1050 even has a nominal FP16 capability of 29.10 GFLOPS (1:64), which the GT 740M lacks entirely.

The GTX 1050 also features a more modern feature set. It supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the GT 740M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. The bus interface improves from PCIe 3.0 x8 to PCIe 3.0 x16, though both are PCIe 3.0. The GTX 1050 is a dual-slot card with dedicated display outputs (DVI, HDMI 2.0, DisplayPort 1.4a), whereas the GT 740M is an MXM module with outputs dependent on the portable device.

Where Each One Wins

The data is clear: the GTX 1050 wins every single benchmark category where both are tested. There is no workload in the FACT PACK where the GT 740M comes out ahead. Therefore, the "wins" for the GT 740M are only in the context of its own generation or its power characteristics.

For the GT 740M, the primary advantage is its power envelope. With a TDP of 33 W versus the GTX 1050’s 75 W, the GT 740M is designed for thin-and-light laptops where battery life and thermals are paramount. It uses no power connectors and is an MXM module, making it a drop-in solution for older ultraportables. Its performance is sufficient for legacy DirectX 11-era games or basic 2D workloads, but the data suggests it is outclassed in any modern 3D application.

The GTX 1050 is the clear winner for any user needing actual gaming or GPU-accelerated compute. Its 112.1 GB/s bandwidth and 1.862 TFLOPS FP32 performance make it viable for 1080p gaming at medium settings in titles from its era. The Passmark G3D score of 5,028 indicates a solid mid-range desktop replacement capability. It also has a wider API support profile, including Vulkan 1.4, which future-proofs it for newer engines that leverage this low-overhead API.

The GT 740M’s only "win" is historical: it was a capable entry-level part for its time, and its 22nd percentile ranking vs all GPUs is nearly identical to the GTX 1050’s 21st percentile. This means that despite the massive performance gap, both cards sit at the bottom of the overall GPU hierarchy today, which reflects how quickly mobile graphics have advanced.

FAQ

Q: Is the GeForce GTX 1050 always faster than the GT 740M?

A: Yes, in every benchmark test where both are present, the GTX 1050 wins. The Geekbench OpenCL score is 15,233 vs 3,974 (73.9% faster), and the Vulkan score is 8,995 vs 3,459 (61.5% faster).

Q: Why is the GT 740M's average benchmark score higher than the GTX 1050's?

A: The GT 740M has only two Geekbench results, both relatively high. The GTX 1050 has eleven results, including several low Passmark DirectX 9/10/12 scores that pull its average down to 3,629, below the GT 740M's 3,717.

Q: What is the biggest architectural difference between the two?

A: The manufacturing process and memory bandwidth. The GT 740M uses 28 nm TSMC with DDR3 on a 64-bit bus (14.40 GB/s), while the GTX 1050 uses 14 nm Samsung with GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus (112.1 GB/s).

Q: Does the GT 740M support the same APIs as the GTX 1050?

A: No. The GTX 1050 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the GT 740M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. The GTX 1050 also has FP16 support (29.10 GFLOPS), which the GT 740M lacks.

Q: Which card has a higher power draw?

A: The GTX 1050 has a TDP of 75 W, more than double the GT 740M's 33 W. The GTX 1050 also has a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the GT 740M requires no external power connectors.

Q: Are these cards comparable in their market positioning?

A: Both sit near the bottom of the performance percentile rankings (22nd for GT 740M, 21st for GTX 1050). However, the GTX 1050's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 6770, while the GT 740M's rivals are older parts like the Quadro 3000M and GT 635M.

The Verdict

The data paints a one-sided picture. The GeForce GTX 1050 is categorically superior in every measured performance metric, from raw compute (1.862 TFLOPS vs 793.3 GFLOPS) to memory bandwidth (112.1 GB/s vs 14.40 GB/s). Any user choosing between these two for a gaming or compute workload should select the GTX 1050 without hesitation, provided the system can accommodate its 75 W TDP and dual-slot footprint.

The GeForce GT 740M is not a competitor in the same arena. Its only justification is legacy system integration — it is an MXM module with no power connectors, designed for ultraportables where the 33 W TDP is a hard constraint. In that context, it provides basic 3D acceleration, but the benchmark data shows it is outclassed by even the GTX 1050's nearest rivals, such as the GT 735M, which scores 3,616 vs the GT 740M's 3,717.

For a buyer today, the GTX 1050 is the clear choice for any task requiring GPU acceleration. The GT 740M should only be considered if the system's physical and power limitations leave no alternative. The percentile rankings (21st vs 22nd) are a red herring — they reflect the vast number of modern GPUs that far outclass both, but within this pairing, the GTX 1050 is the only viable option for serious work.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 |

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

| Architecture | Kepler 2.0 | Pascal |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Samsung |

| Transistors | 1,020 million | 3,300 million |

| Die Size | 87 mm² | 132 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 11.7M / mm² | 25.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 980 MHz | 1354 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1033 MHz | 1455 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) | 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 14.40 GB/s | 112.1 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 384 | 640 |

| TMUs | 32 | 40 |

| ROPs | 8 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 8.264 GPixel/s | 46.56 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 33.06 GTexel/s | 58.20 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 793.3 GFLOPS | 1.862 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | None | 29.10 GFLOPS (1:64) |

| TDP | 33 W | 75 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | None |

| Suggested PSU | None | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_0) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.175 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2013-06-19 | 2016-10-24 |