NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770 vs NVIDIA T400 4 GB Comparison

The NVIDIA T400 4 GB and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770 sit surprisingly close together in the database's aggregate rankings, yet they represent opposite design philosophies separated by eight years of GPU development. The T400 is a low-power professional card built for efficiency, while the GTX 770 is a high-power gaming flagship of its era. Their head-to-head record is split one apiece, and the percentile gap between them is just three points (60 vs 57), making this one of the tighter cross-generational matchups in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only two tests overlap between these cards, and they split the results, each by a double-digit margin.

The OpenCL contest goes to the T400 by a clear distance: 17320 versus 15707, a 10.3% advantage for the Turing-based card. That result is consistent with the T400's stronger average benchmark score of 16792, which places it in the 60th percentile of all GPUs measured. Its nearest rival cluster confirms the strength of that position: the AMD Radeon RX 7600S averages 16696, only 0.6% behind, while the NVIDIA Tesla M4 (16932), the AMD Radeon HD 7970M (17019), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 (17037) all sit within 1.4% of it. In other words, the T400 trades blows with cards spanning multiple generations and market segments.

The Vulkan test flips the picture entirely. The GTX 770 scores 19166 against the T400's 16263, a 15.1% win for the Kepler card. That single result is the largest swing in the matchup and shows that the GTX 770's raw hardware resources, particularly its wide memory subsystem, still translate into real throughput in modern graphics APIs. Notably, the GTX 770 also posts a Geekbench Metal score of 9369, a test the T400 does not record, giving the older card a broader benchmark footprint in the database.

With winsA at 1 and winsB at 1, the head-to-head is a genuine split. The deciding factor is consistency: the T400's average score of 16792 exceeds the GTX 770's 14747 by roughly 14%, and its higher percentile ranking (60 versus 57) reflects that. The GTX 770's own rival set, the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT (14692), the NVIDIA Quadro M2000 (14532), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti (15063), and the AMD Radeon Pro 560X (15082), sits in a lower band than the T400's competition.

Where Each One Wins

The T400 wins where compute efficiency and modern API support matter. Its 10.3% OpenCL victory comes despite having roughly one third of the GTX 770's shading units (384 versus 1536) and one quarter of its TMUs (24 versus 128). That gap is closed by architecture and clocks: the T400 boosts to 1425 MHz against the GTX 770's 1085 MHz, and its 12 nm Turing design extracts far more from each of its resources. It also supports Vulkan 1.4 versus the GTX 770's Vulkan 1.2.175, and DirectX 12 feature level 12_1 versus 11_0, meaning it complies with more demanding feature sets. Workloads built on OpenCL or newer API feature tiers favor the T400.

The GTX 770 wins where bandwidth and rasterization throughput dominate. Its 256-bit bus and GDDR5 memory deliver 224.4 GB/s, nearly three times the T400's 80 GB/s over a 64-bit bus. Its texture rate of 138.9 GTexel/s dwarfs the T400's 34.20 GTexel/s, and its pixel rate of 34.72 GPixel/s beats the T400's 22.80 GPixel/s. Its FP32 output of 3.333 TFLOPS is more than triple the T400's 1,094.4 GFLOPS. The 15.1% Vulkan win is the direct evidence: when a workload leans on memory bandwidth and texture fill, the old flagship still dominates.

The Verdict

The data supports a split decision with a lean toward the T400 on overall standing. Its higher average score, higher percentile, and OpenCL win give it the edge in general-purpose and compute-adjacent work, all while consuming 30 W against the GTX 770's 230 W and requiring no power connectors at all. The T400 is also the only one of the two with an FP16 capability, at 2.189 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio.

Pick the GTX 770 if the workload is bandwidth- and fill-rate-bound and Vulkan performance is the metric that matters: 19166 versus 16263 is not a narrow margin. Pick the T400 for everything else: better OpenCL performance, a higher aggregate position, modern API support, quadruple the memory capacity (4 GB versus 2 GB), and dramatically lower power and thermal demands in a single-slot form factor. Both cards are end-of-life, so neither represents a current platform, but as database entries go, the T400's efficiency-first design holds up better against time.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins the overall benchmark average?

A: The T400, with an average score of 16792 versus the GTX 770's 14747, roughly a 14% lead, and a percentile ranking of 60 versus 57.

Q: Did either card win both head-to-head tests?

A: No. The T400 won Geekbench OpenCL by 10.3% (17320 versus 15707), and the GTX 770 won Geekbench Vulkan by 15.1% (19166 versus 16263).

Q: How do the power requirements compare?

A: The T400 has a 30 W TDP, no power connectors, a single-slot design, and a suggested 200 W PSU. The GTX 770 has a 230 W TDP, one 6-pin plus one 8-pin connector, a dual-slot design, and a suggested 550 W PSU.

Q: Which card has more memory?

A: The T400, with 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus at 80 GB/s. The GTX 770 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus at 224.4 GB/s, so the older card trades capacity for bandwidth.

Q: Which GPUs are these cards' closest rivals?

A: The T400's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 7600S and NVIDIA Tesla M4, within about 1% of its score. The GTX 770's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT and NVIDIA Quadro M2000, similarly clustered.

Q: Do either of these cards support ray tracing or AI accelerators?

A: No. The database records no RT cores and no tensor cores for either card.

Architecture Differences

The architectural distance between these two is substantial. The T400 uses the TU117 chip on NVIDIA's Turing architecture, fabbed at TSMC on a 12 nm process, with 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die for a density of 23.5M per mm². The GTX 770 uses the GK104 chip on the Kepler architecture, also fabbed at TSMC but on a 28 nm process, with 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die for a density of 12.0M per mm². The T400 packs more transistors into a smaller die at nearly double the density, which is the clearest single indicator of the generational gap.

Clock behavior differs sharply too. The T400 runs a 420 MHz base with a 1425 MHz boost, a very wide dynamic range typical of efficiency-focused designs. The GTX 770 runs 1046 MHz base and 1085 MHz boost, a tight range typical of a classic high-power flagship. Neither card has RT cores or tensor cores. The T400 belongs to the Quadro Turing (Tx000) generation, successor line Workstation Ampere, predecessor Quadro Volta. The GTX 770 belongs to GeForce 700, successor line GeForce 900, predecessor GeForce 600.

Specification Differences

• Release date: T400 on 2021-05-05; GTX 770 on 2013-05-29.
• Memory: 4 GB GDDR6, 64-bit, 80 GB/s, 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective) versus 2 GB GDDR5, 256-bit, 224.4 GB/s, 1753 MHz (7 Gbps effective).
• Shader resources: 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, 16 ROPs versus 1536 shading units, 128 TMUs, 32 ROPs.
• Compute: 1,094.4 GFLOPS FP32 and 2.189 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1) versus 3.333 TFLOPS FP32 and no listed FP16.
• Rates: 22.80 GPixel/s and 34.20 GTexel/s versus 34.72 GPixel/s and 138.9 GTexel/s.
• Power and form factor: 30 W, single-slot, no power connectors, 200 W suggested PSU versus 230 W, dual-slot, 6-pin plus 8-pin, 550 W suggested PSU.
• Outputs: 3x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a versus 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2.
• API support: DirectX 12 (12_1), Vulkan 1.4 versus DirectX 12 (11_0), Vulkan 1.2.175; both support OpenGL 4.6.
• Physical dimensions: The GTX 770 measures 267 mm long, 111 mm high, and 38 mm wide; the T400's dimensions are not recorded in the database.
• Launch MSRP: The GTX 770 carries a launch MSRP of 399 USD; no launch MSRP is recorded for the T400.