NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M vs NVIDIA Quadro 3000M Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the NVIDIA Quadro 3000M and GeForce GT 740M compare in raw benchmark performance?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GeForce GT 740M scores 3974, while the Quadro 3000M scores 3718. The GT 740M wins the head-to-head benchmark by a margin of -6.4%, meaning it is approximately 6.4% faster than the Quadro in this specific compute test.

Q: Which GPU has better overall average performance based on the database?

A: The average benchmark scores are virtually identical. The Quadro 3000M has an average score of 3718, and the GeForce GT 740M has an average score of 3717. The delta percentage between them is 0%, placing them in a dead heat in terms of overall average performance.

Q: What are the architectural differences between the two chips?

A: The Quadro 3000M uses the GF104 chip built on the Fermi architecture with a 40 nm process. The GeForce GT 740M uses the GK208 chip on the Kepler 2.0 architecture with a 28 nm process. This results in the GT 740M having a much smaller die size (87 mm²) and lower transistor count (1,020 million) compared to the Quadro's 332 mm² die and 1,950 million transistors.

Q: How do the memory subsystems differ between these two mobile GPUs?

A: The Quadro 3000M features 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 80.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The GeForce GT 740M also has 2 GB of memory, but it is DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, which limits bandwidth to just 14.40 GB/s. This is a major difference in memory architecture.

Q: Which GPU has a higher TDP and what does that imply?

A: The Quadro 3000M has a TDP of 75 W, while the GeForce GT 740M has a TDP of 33 W. The data indicates the GT 740M is far more power-efficient, likely making it a better fit for thinner or more battery-conscious laptops, whereas the Quadro may be found in larger, more performance-oriented workstations.

Q: What is the performance percentile ranking for these GPUs?

A: Both the Quadro 3000M and the GeForce GT 740M are ranked in the 22nd percentile against all GPUs. This means they are positioned at the same level in the overall performance hierarchy, with 78% of all GPUs being faster.

---

Architecture Differences

The most fundamental difference lies in the chip design and manufacturing process. The Quadro 3000M is built on the GF104 chip using the Fermi architecture, produced on a 40 nm process at TSMC. This older design packs 1,950 million transistors into a large 332 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 5.9M / mm². In contrast, the GeForce GT 740M utilizes the GK208 chip based on the Kepler 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a more modern 28 nm process. This allows TSMC to fit 1,020 million transistors into a much smaller 87 mm² die, achieving a significantly higher transistor density of 11.7M / mm².

These architectural differences lead to distinct resource allocations. The Quadro 3000M has 240 shading units, 40 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 raster output units (ROPs). The GeForce GT 740M, despite having fewer TMUs (32) and far fewer ROPs (8), boasts a higher count of 384 shading units. This suggests the GT 740M is designed for compute-heavy shader workloads, while the Quadro's configuration leans towards fill-rate and pixel processing.

The memory architecture also diverges sharply. The Quadro 3000M uses a 256-bit memory bus with GDDR5 memory, achieving a bandwidth of 80.00 GB/s. The GT 740M, on the other hand, is limited to a 64-bit bus with slower DDR3 memory, capping bandwidth at 14.40 GB/s. This is a critical distinction, as the Quadro's memory subsystem provides over 5.5 times the bandwidth of the GT 740M, which can heavily impact performance in bandwidth-sensitive scenarios.

Feature support also differs. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but the GeForce GT 740M adds Vulkan support up to version 1.2.175, which the Quadro 3000M lacks. The bus interface is another point of difference, with the Quadro using MXM-B (3.0) and the GT 740M using PCIe 3.0 x8.

---

The Verdict

The data presents a fascinating clash between a professional mobile workstation GPU and a consumer mobile graphics chip. In terms of raw compute performance, the GeForce GT 740M is the outright winner in the Geekbench OpenCL head-to-head, scoring 3974 against the Quadro 3000M's 3718. However, the overall average benchmark scores show a complete tie, with the Quadro at 3718 and the GT 740M at 3717, a delta of 0%.

So, which should you pick? If your primary concern is pure compute throughput in OpenCL applications, the GeForce GT 740M is the superior choice based on its head-to-head benchmark victory. Its higher shading unit count and lower power draw (33 W vs 75 W) make it a more efficient and modern solution for general-purpose tasks.

However, the Quadro 3000M is not without merit. Its massive advantage in memory bandwidth (80.00 GB/s vs 14.40 GB/s) indicates it is vastly better suited for tasks that require moving large amounts of data, such as high-resolution textures, complex 3D scenes, or specific professional visualization workloads. The Quadro's larger memory bus and GDDR5 memory are hallmarks of a workstation GPU designed for data-intensive tasks, even if its compute units are older.

For a buyer, the choice hinges on the workload. For a user prioritizing compute performance and power efficiency in a consumer laptop, the GeForce GT 740M is the logical pick. For a professional who relies on memory bandwidth for their specific applications, the Quadro 3000M offers an advantage that its raw compute score does not reflect. The equal average scores suggest that in mixed workloads, either GPU would perform at a similar level.

---

Specification Differences

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

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Chip | GF104 | GK208 |

| Architecture | Fermi | Kepler 2.0 |

| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 1,950 million | 1,020 million |

| Die Size | 332 mm² | 87 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 5.9M / mm² | 11.7M / mm² |

| Base Clock | N/A | 980 MHz |

| Boost Clock | N/A | 1033 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 625 MHz / 2.5 Gbps effective | 900 MHz / 1800 Mbps effective |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 80.00 GB/s | 14.40 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 240 | 384 |

| TMUs | 40 | 32 |

| ROPs | 32 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 4.500 GPixel/s | 8.264 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 18.00 GTexel/s | 33.06 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 432.0 GFLOPS | 793.3 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 75 W | 33 W |

| Bus Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| Vulkan API | N/A | 1.2.175 |

---

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database includes a single head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. In this test, the GeForce GT 740M scored 3974, while the Quadro 3000M scored 3718. The GT 740M is the declared winner, with a delta percentage of -6.4%, which indicates the Quadro is 6.4% slower than the GT 740M in this test.

This result is somewhat surprising given the specifications. The GT 740M's victory is likely attributable to its higher FP32 performance (793.3 GFLOPS vs 432.0 GFLOPS) and greater number of shading units (384 vs 240). OpenCL workloads often scale with raw shader throughput, which is where the Kepler-based GT 740M excels.

However, the margin of victory is modest. A 6.4% performance lead in a compute benchmark is not a dramatic difference, and it is easily offset by the Quadro's other strengths. The Quadro's 80.00 GB/s memory bandwidth is more than five times that of the GT 740M, which would likely make it the faster card in memory-bound scenarios that are not captured by this particular OpenCL test.

In terms of average benchmark scores, the two are perfectly matched. The Quadro 3000M has an average score of 3718, and the GT 740M is just one point behind at 3717. This effectively confirms that, across a broader range of potential workloads, the overall performance is identical, with the GT 740M having a slight edge in compute and the Quadro likely having an edge in memory-intensive tasks.

---

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M Wins:

• Compute Performance: The GT 740M wins the only head-to-head benchmark (Geekbench OpenCL) with a 6.4% lead, directly demonstrating its superior raw compute throughput.
• Shading and Texture Throughput: With 384 shading units, a texture rate of 33.06 GTexel/s, and FP32 performance of 793.3 GFLOPS, the GT 740M is clearly built for shader-heavy and compute-intensive tasks. Its pixel rate of 8.264 GPixel/s is also significantly higher.
• Power Efficiency: A TDP of 33 W versus 75 W makes the GT 740M a far more efficient choice for thin-and-light laptops or any system where battery life and heat are a concern.
• Modern API Support: The GT 740M supports Vulkan 1.2.175, a feature entirely absent from the Quadro 3000M, offering access to modern graphics APIs.

NVIDIA Quadro 3000M Wins:

• Memory Bandwidth: This is the Quadro's dominant advantage. With 80.00 GB/s of bandwidth on a 256-bit GDDR5 interface, it offers over 5.5 times the memory bandwidth of the GT 740M. This is crucial for applications that move large data sets, such as high-resolution textures, CAD models, or video editing.
• Fill Rate Balance: While the GT 740M has higher pixel and texture rates, the Quadro's configuration with 40 TMUs and 32 ROPs, paired with its high bandwidth, suggests it can sustain high throughput in memory-bound rendering pipelines without stalling.
• Professional Workstation Legacy: As part of the Quadro line, its architecture is designed for professional workloads, though the data provided does not include specific professional benchmarks to quantify this beyond the memory advantage.