NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M vs NVIDIA Quadro K2100M Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro K2100M and NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M are both 28 nm Kepler-era mobile parts from 2013, but they target very different workloads. The benchmark data reveals a clear split: the Quadro K2100M dominates compute-oriented APIs, while the GeForce GT 745M takes a decisive lead in the Vulkan graphics API. Their average benchmark scores are close—4151 for the Quadro versus 3953 for the GT 745M—but that narrow gap masks significant per-test divergence. The Quadro sits at the 25th percentile of all GPUs, while the GT 745M sits at the 23rd, placing both firmly in entry-level territory. The real story is not which is faster overall, but which API each one favors, and what that means for real-world usage.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro K2100M is the clear winner in compute-heavy workloads. It takes the Geekbench Metal test with a score of 3524 against the GT 745M’s 2777, a 26.9% advantage. The OpenCL result is even more lopsided: 4587 versus 3580, a 28.1% margin. These two wins suggest that the Quadro’s architecture is better suited to general-purpose GPU compute, which aligns with its professional workstation positioning. For tasks that leverage OpenCL or Metal—such as rendering, scientific simulation, or GPU-accelerated content creation—the Quadro K2100M is the stronger choice by a substantial margin.

The GeForce GT 745M wins in Vulkan, scoring 5502 against the Quadro’s 4343, a 21.1% advantage. Vulkan is a low-overhead graphics API, and the GT 745M’s lead here suggests it handles graphics workloads more efficiently. This is the consumer-facing part, and the GT 745M’s performance in Vulkan indicates it may be better suited for gaming or other graphics-intensive applications that use modern APIs. The wins split 2-1 in favor of the Quadro, but the magnitude of the GT 745M’s Vulkan victory is nearly as large as the Quadro’s OpenCL win, making the overall picture more nuanced than a simple win count.

The data shows a classic divide: the Quadro K2100M is built for compute, the GT 745M for graphics. If your workload is primarily OpenCL or Metal-based, the Quadro offers a significant performance uplift. If you’re running Vulkan-based games or apps, the GT 745M pulls ahead. Neither card is a general-purpose champion; each excels in its own domain.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on NVIDIA’s Kepler architecture at TSMC’s 28 nm node, but they use different chips with different configurations. The Quadro K2100M uses the GK106S die, which packs 2,540 million transistors onto a 221 mm² die. The GT 745M uses the GK107 chip, with 1,270 million transistors on a smaller 118 mm² die. That’s a 2x difference in transistor count and nearly a 2x difference in die size, which explains the Quadro’s compute advantage. Transistor density is similar—11.5M per mm² for the Quadro versus 10.8M per mm² for the GT 745M—so the Quadro’s lead comes from raw silicon area, not density.

The Quadro K2100M has 576 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The GT 745M is cut down to 384 shading units, 32 TMUs, and the same 16 ROPs. The Quadro has 50% more shading units and 50% more TMUs, which directly translates to higher throughput. Pixel rate for the Quadro is 8.004 GPixel/s versus 4.392 GPixel/s for the GT 745M, and texture rate is 32.02 GTexel/s versus 17.57 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute rating is 768.4 GFLOPS for the Quadro and 421.6 GFLOPS for the GT 745M—a 1.8x difference. This is why the Quadro dominates in compute benchmarks.

Memory configurations are similar in capacity and bus width—both have 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus—but the clocks differ. The Quadro runs its memory at 752 MHz (3 Gbps effective), yielding 48.13 GB/s of bandwidth. The GT 745M runs memory at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective), delivering 64.00 GB/s. The GT 745M actually has 33% more memory bandwidth, which likely contributes to its Vulkan performance lead. The Quadro’s base and boost clocks are both locked at 667 MHz, while the GT 745M’s clocks are not specified in the data.

Power and interface differ too. The Quadro is a 55 W MXM Module with no power connectors, using an MXM-A (3.0) bus interface. The GT 745M is a 45 W IGP part with a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface. Both are end-of-life products, but the Quadro’s predecessor is Quadro Fermi-M and its successor is Quadro Maxwell-M, while the GT 745M’s lineage runs from GeForce 600M to GeForce 800M. The Quadro was released on 2013-07-22, about four months after the GT 745M’s 2013-03-31 launch.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the Quadro K2100M comes in OpenCL, where it scores 4587 against the GT 745M’s 3580. That 28.1% delta is the biggest gap across all three tests. The Quadro’s 576 shading units and 768.4 GFLOPS FP32 throughput are the obvious drivers here. OpenCL is a compute API, and the Quadro’s extra silicon pays off directly. The Metal test shows a similar pattern, with the Quadro scoring 3524 versus 2777, a 26.9% advantage. Metal is Apple’s GPU API, and while it has graphics components, it is heavily used for compute tasks in creative applications. The Quadro’s lead in both compute-oriented APIs is consistent and substantial.

The GT 745M’s win is in Vulkan, where it scores 5502 versus the Quadro’s 4343, a 21.1% margin. This is a significant reversal. Vulkan is a low-overhead graphics API designed for games and real-time rendering. The GT 745M’s higher memory bandwidth (64.00 GB/s versus 48.13 GB/s) may be a factor, but the architecture is fundamentally different. The GT 745M has fewer shading units but a more graphics-focused design. The result is that in Vulkan, the GT 745M is not just ahead—it is 21.1% ahead, which is a large enough gap to be noticeable in real-world gaming scenarios.

Looking at the numbers side by side, the Quadro wins two tests with deltas of 26.9% and 28.1%, while the GT 745M wins one test with a delta of -21.1%. The average benchmark scores reflect this: the Quadro’s 4151 is only 5% higher than the GT 745M’s 3953. The averages are pulled together by the GT 745M’s strong Vulkan showing. If a workload is Vulkan-heavy, the GT 745M is the better choice. If it is OpenCL or Metal-heavy, the Quadro is clearly superior. The data shows no single winner across all APIs.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K2100M has an average benchmark score of 4151, which is about 5% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M’s 3953.

Q: How much faster is the Quadro K2100M in OpenCL?

A: The Quadro K2100M scores 4587 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 28.1% higher than the GT 745M’s 3580.

Q: In which benchmark does the GeForce GT 745M win?

A: The GT 745M wins in Geekbench Vulkan, scoring 5502 against the Quadro K2100M’s 4343, a 21.1% advantage.

Q: What are the transistor counts for each GPU?

A: The Quadro K2100M uses the GK106S chip with 2,540 million transistors on a 221 mm² die. The GT 745M uses the GK107 chip with 1,270 million transistors on a 118 mm² die.

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The GeForce GT 745M has higher memory bandwidth at 64.00 GB/s, compared to the Quadro K2100M’s 48.13 GB/s, despite both using 2 GB GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: What is the FP32 compute performance difference?

A: The Quadro K2100M delivers 768.4 GFLOPS FP32, while the GT 745M delivers 421.6 GFLOPS, giving the Quadro a 1.8x compute advantage.

The Verdict

The data points to two distinct use cases. For compute-centric workloads—OpenCL, Metal, or any general-purpose GPU compute—the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M is the clear pick. Its 28.1% OpenCL lead and 26.9% Metal lead over the GT 745M are decisive. The Quadro’s 576 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 768.4 GFLOPS FP32 throughput make it a more capable compute engine, despite its lower memory bandwidth. If your application is professional software that uses OpenCL or Metal for rendering, simulation, or data processing, the Quadro K2100M is the stronger choice.

For graphics-heavy workloads, specifically those using the Vulkan API, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M is the better option. Its 21.1% Vulkan lead over the Quadro is substantial and indicates better real-time rendering performance. The GT 745M’s 64.00 GB/s memory bandwidth and graphics-oriented GK107 chip design give it an edge in low-overhead graphics APIs. If you’re running Vulkan-based games or graphics applications, the GT 745M will deliver better performance.

The choice comes down to API and workload. The Quadro K2100M wins 2 out of 3 benchmarks and has a higher average score, but the GT 745M’s Vulkan victory is too large to ignore. The Quadro is the compute specialist; the GT 745M is the graphics specialist. Neither is a universal winner. If you prioritize OpenCL and Metal, choose the Quadro K2100M. If Vulkan is your primary API, choose the GeForce GT 745M. The benchmark data does not support a single recommendation for all users—it supports a workload-based decision.