NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M vs NVIDIA Quadro P1000 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M and the NVIDIA Quadro P1000 are both end-of-life mobile and professional graphics solutions, but the recorded data places them in completely different performance tiers. The Quadro P1000 wins both head-to-head benchmark comparisons, often by substantial margins, while the GT 745M holds a higher overall percentile ranking due to its specific benchmark mix. This analysis breaks down where each card excels, the architectural generation gap, and what the numbers mean for real-world task selection.

Where Each One Wins

The Quadro P1000 is the clear winner in raw compute and modern API performance. It dominates the GeForce GT 745M in Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan tests, with the OpenCL gap being particularly massive. The P1000’s benchmark suite also includes DirectX and Passmark tests, giving it a broader performance profile that spans legacy and modern workloads.

The GeForce GT 745M, by contrast, wins in no head-to-head comparison. Its recorded benchmarks are limited to Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan, and in the two tests shared with the P1000, it finishes behind. However, the GT 745M’s average benchmark score of 3953 is higher than the P1000’s 3163, a discrepancy driven by the different test sets. The GT 745M’s Geekbench Metal score of 2777 and its OpenCL score of 3580 contribute to a higher average, while the P1000’s Passmark scores, particularly the low DirectX scores, pull its average down.

For use-case split, the data suggests the P1000 is for tasks requiring heavy compute, such as OpenCL-accelerated workloads, and modern graphics APIs like Vulkan. The GT 745M, with its superior average benchmark score, is not necessarily a better card, but it holds up better in its narrower test set, particularly in Metal and OpenCL relative to its own baseline. The P1000’s Passmark G3D score of 4512 indicates it can handle general 3D rendering tasks, while its G2D score of 589 shows competence in 2D workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations. The GT 745M is based on the Kepler architecture, using the GK107 chip, while the P1000 uses the Pascal architecture with the GP107 chip. This is a generational leap: Kepler launched in 2013, while Pascal arrived in 2017.

The manufacturing process differs significantly. The GT 745M uses a 28 nm process at TSMC, while the P1000 uses a 14 nm process at Samsung. This process shrink allows the P1000 to pack 3,300 million transistors into a 132 mm² die, compared to the GT 745M’s 1,270 million transistors on a 118 mm² die. The transistor density tells the story: the P1000 has 25.0M transistors per mm², versus the GT 745M’s 10.8M per mm².

Core configurations are vastly different. The P1000 has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The GT 745M has 384 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The P1000’s doubling of ROPs and its higher shader count give it a structural advantage in pixel processing and compute throughput.

Clock speeds also favor the P1000. It has a base clock of 1266 MHz and a boost clock of 1480 MHz, while the GT 745M has no recorded base or boost clock, only a memory clock of 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective). The P1000’s memory clock is 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective).

Memory capacity and bandwidth favor the P1000. It has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 80.19 GB/s bandwidth. The GT 745M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on the same 128-bit bus, but only 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. This 25% bandwidth advantage for the P1000 matters for memory-bound tasks.

The P1000 also supports a newer DirectX version: 12 (12_1) versus the GT 745M’s 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the P1000’s Vulkan support is 1.4 versus the GT 745M’s 1.2.175.

Power and physical design differ as well. The GT 745M is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with a 45 W TDP, while the P1000 is a single-slot card with a 47 W TDP and no power connectors, requiring a suggested 200 W PSU. The GT 745M has no suggested PSU, reflecting its mobile-centric design, while the P1000 is a standalone card measuring 150 mm in length and 69 mm in height.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two cards share two benchmarks: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. The P1000 wins both.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the P1000 scores 13584 against the GT 745M’s 3580. That is a delta of 73.6% in favor of the P1000. The P1000 is nearly four times faster in this compute-heavy test. This is the single largest gap between the two, reflecting the P1000’s superior shader count, higher clocks, and newer architecture.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the P1000 scores 7739 against the GT 745M’s 5502. The delta here is 28.9% in favor of the P1000. While the margin is smaller than in OpenCL, it is still a decisive win. The Vulkan test exercises modern graphics API efficiency, and the P1000’s Pascal architecture, with its DirectX 12_1 support, handles this workload better than the Kepler-based GT 745M.

The GT 745M’s Geekbench Metal score of 2777 is not present in the head-to-head table, but it contributes to the card’s average. The P1000 has no Metal score recorded, so a direct comparison in that API is impossible from the data.

The P1000’s Passmark scores provide additional context. Its DirectX 10 score is 21, DirectX 11 is 31, DirectX 12 is 19, and DirectX 9 is 79. These are low scores, but they are part of a different test suite than the Geekbench results. The P1000’s Passmark G3D score of 4512 and G2D score of 589 offer a more rounded picture of its capabilities. Its compute score of 1891 in Passmark is modest compared to its Geekbench OpenCL result, indicating that different test methodologies yield different relative strengths.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M has an average benchmark score of 3953, while the NVIDIA Quadro P1000 has an average of 3163. This difference is due to the P1000’s inclusion of Passmark DirectX scores, which are low, versus the GT 745M’s limited Geekbench-focused test set.

Q: How much faster is the Quadro P1000 in OpenCL?

A: The P1000 scores 13584 in Geekbench OpenCL versus the GT 745M’s 3580, a delta of 73.6% in favor of the P1000.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Quadro P1000 has 80.19 GB/s bandwidth, while the GeForce GT 745M has 64.00 GB/s. Both use a 128-bit bus and GDDR5 memory.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The Quadro P1000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GeForce GT 745M supports DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Q: What is the transistor count for each chip?

A: The Quadro P1000’s GP107 chip has 3,300 million transistors, while the GeForce GT 745M’s GK107 chip has 1,270 million transistors.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel rate?

A: The Quadro P1000 has a pixel rate of 47.36 GPixel/s, while the GeForce GT 745M has a pixel rate of 4.392 GPixel/s. The P1000 is over ten times faster in this metric.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA Quadro P1000 is the superior GPU in raw performance. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, and its architectural advantages in clock speed, core count, memory bandwidth, and process node are decisive. The P1000 is the correct choice for any workload that leverages OpenCL compute, modern Vulkan rendering, or DirectX 12_1 features. Its 4 GB memory capacity and higher bandwidth also make it more suitable for larger datasets.

The GeForce GT 745M, while older and less capable, still holds relevance in specific contexts. Its higher average benchmark score, driven by its Geekbench Metal and OpenCL results, suggests it performs adequately in those specific tests. However, this is a statistical artifact of the different benchmark suites, not evidence of general superiority. The GT 745M’s 45 W TDP and IGP form factor make it a low-power option for portable devices, but its 2 GB memory and lower compute throughput limit its utility.

For professional workloads, the Quadro P1000 is the only viable choice. Its single-slot design, 4x mini-DisplayPort outputs, and Pascal architecture are built for workstation tasks. The GT 745M’s portable-device-dependent outputs and end-of-life status make it a legacy part with no forward-looking use case. The verdict is simple: choose the P1000 for performance, choose the GT 745M only when power constraints or legacy compatibility demand it.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M | NVIDIA Quadro P1000 |

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

| Chip | GK107 | GP107 |

| Architecture | Kepler | Pascal |

| Generation | GeForce 700M | Quadro Pascal (Px000) |

| Process Node | 28 nm (TSMC) | 14 nm (Samsung) |

| Transistors | 1,270 million | 3,300 million |

| Die Size | 118 mm² | 132 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 10.8M / mm² | 25.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | None recorded | 1266 MHz |

| Boost Clock | None recorded | 1480 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) | 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 2 GB GDDR5 | 4 GB GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | 128 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 64.00 GB/s | 80.19 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 384 | 640 |

| TMUs | 32 | 40 |

| ROPs | 16 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 4.392 GPixel/s | 47.36 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 17.57 GTexel/s | 59.20 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 421.6 GFLOPS | 1.894 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 45 W | 47 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | None recorded | None |

| Suggested PSU | None recorded | 200 W |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

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

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.2.175 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2013-03-31 | 2017-02-06 |

| Predecessor | GeForce 600M | Quadro Maxwell |

| Successor | GeForce 800M | Quadro Volta |