NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 vs NVIDIA T400 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly along workload lines. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 wins both recorded head-to-head tests, and it wins them by substantial margins. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 780 scores 22,863 against the T400’s 17,039, a 34.2% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap widens to 53.4%, with the GTX 780 posting 24,514 versus 15,976. That pattern tells a straightforward story: if your workload scales across the GTX 780’s larger array of execution resources, it will pull ahead decisively.

The GTX 780’s wins come from sheer scale. It has 2,304 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 48 render output units. The T400 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. That is a 6x difference in shader count and an 8x difference in TMUs. The GTX 780 also has a 384-bit memory bus with 288.4 GB/s of bandwidth, while the T400 is limited to a 64-bit bus and 80.00 GB/s. For compute-heavy tasks like OpenCL and Vulkan, the GTX 780’s parallel throughput and memory bandwidth dominate.

But the T400 is not without a winning context. It is a single-slot, 30 W card with no power connectors, while the GTX 780 is a dual-slot, 250 W card requiring both a 6-pin and an 8-pin connector. The T400 also supports DirectX 12 (12_1), whereas the GTX 780 is capped at DirectX 12 (11_0). The T400’s newer Turing architecture provides features the older Kepler chip cannot match, even if raw compute scores lag. For compatibility with the latest API feature levels, the T400 wins on specification grounds, not on benchmark performance.

The percentile data confirms the GTX 780 sits slightly higher in the overall distribution. The GTX 780 lands at the 64th percentile among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 19,164. The T400 sits at the 60th percentile, with an average score of 16,508. That 2,656-point average gap is smaller than the head-to-head deltas, which suggests the T400 performs relatively better in other test suites not included here. But in the two tests the database records for both cards, the GTX 780 is clearly the stronger compute performer.

The Verdict

Choose the GTX 780 if your priority is raw compute throughput in OpenCL or Vulkan workloads. The data shows a 34.2% lead in OpenCL and a 53.4% lead in Vulkan, both decisive. The GTX 780 also has 3 GB of GDDR5 memory versus the T400’s 2 GB of GDDR6, and its 288.4 GB/s bandwidth dwarfs the T400’s 80.00 GB/s. If you are running GPU-accelerated tasks that can use over 2 GB of memory, the GTX 780 is the only viable option between these two. It also offers a higher FP32 throughput at 4.156 TFLOPS compared to the T400’s 1,094.4 GFLOPS.

Choose the T400 if your constraints are physical or electrical. The T400 draws 30 W, needs no auxiliary power, and occupies a single slot. The GTX 780 needs 250 W, a 6-pin and an 8-pin connector, a 600 W power supply, and a dual-slot footprint. The T400’s 12 nm Turing node is newer than the GTX 780’s 28 nm Kepler, and its DirectX 12 (12_1) support is a full feature level ahead. The T400 also supports Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 780 is limited to Vulkan 1.2.175. For a low-profile workstation or a system with strict power limits, the T400 is the practical choice, even though it loses every recorded benchmark.

The GTX 780 is end-of-life, as is the T400. Neither card is a future-proof investment. But if you have the power budget and the slot space, the GTX 780 delivers far more compute performance per watt of effort. The T400’s only benchmark win is in efficiency, which is not a recorded metric but is implied by its 30 W TDP versus 250 W. The verdict is simple: the GTX 780 for performance, the T400 for power and size.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct comparisons between these cards, both in Geekbench compute tests. The first is Geekbench OpenCL, where the GTX 780 scores 22,863 and the T400 scores 17,039. The GTX 780 wins by 34.2%. That margin is substantial but not overwhelming; it reflects the GTX 780’s 6x shader advantage being partially offset by the T400’s higher boost clock of 1425 MHz versus 902 MHz. The T400’s boost clock is 58% higher, but it cannot overcome the GTX 780’s raw resource count.

The second test is Geekbench Vulkan, where the GTX 780 scores 24,514 and the T400 scores 15,976. The GTX 780 wins by 53.4%, an even larger margin than OpenCL. Vulkan tends to scale well with shading units and memory bandwidth, both of which favor the GTX 780. The T400’s 64-bit memory bus and 80.00 GB/s bandwidth become a bottleneck in Vulkan workloads that stream large amounts of data. The GTX 780’s 288.4 GB/s bandwidth is 3.6x higher, and its 3 GB frame buffer provides more headroom for larger datasets.

The GTX 780’s average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 19,164, and its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA TITAN Xp at 19,177 (0.1% higher), the Tesla K20m at 19,089 (0.4% lower), the RTX 4050 Mobile at 19,049 (0.6% lower), and the RX 6600 at 19,036 (0.7% lower). The T400’s average is 16,508, with rivals including the RTX 5090 D V2 at 16,504 (0% difference), the Radeon PRO W7500 at 16,415 (0.6% lower), the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell at 16,408 (0.6% lower), and the RX 5700 XT at 16,361 (0.9% lower). The GTX 780 punches in a class above the T400, matching modern mid-range cards despite its 2013 release date.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL?

A: The GTX 780 scores 22,863 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the T400 scores 17,039. The GTX 780 leads by 34.2%.

Q: Which card is faster in Vulkan?

A: The GTX 780 scores 24,514 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the T400 scores 15,976. The GTX 780 leads by 53.4%.

Q: Does the T400 have any advantage in API support?

A: Yes. The T400 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 780 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175.

Q: Which card requires less power?

A: The T400 has a 30 W TDP, needs no power connectors, and requires a 200 W power supply. The GTX 780 has a 250 W TDP, needs a 6-pin and an 8-pin connector, and requires a 600 W power supply.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The GTX 780 has 288.4 GB/s over a 384-bit bus, compared to the T400’s 80.00 GB/s over a 64-bit bus.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No. Both the GTX 780 and the T400 are marked as end-of-life in the database.

Architecture Differences

The GTX 780 uses the GK110 chip on TSMC’s 28 nm process, with 7,080 million transistors on a 561 mm² die. The T400 uses the TU117 chip on TSMC’s 12 nm process, with 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. The transistor density tells the story: the GTX 780 packs 12.6 million transistors per square millimeter, while the T400 packs 23.5 million per square millimeter. The T400’s newer process allows nearly double the density, which explains how it fits a Turing architecture into a much smaller die.

The architectural generations differ significantly. The GTX 780 is Kepler, part of the GeForce 700 series, released May 22, 2013. The T400 is Turing, part of the Quadro Turing (Tx000) series, released May 5, 2021. Turing brings features Kepler lacks, such as support for DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4. The T400 also has FP16 capability at 2.189 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the GTX 780 has no recorded FP16 performance. The GTX 780’s FP32 output is 4.156 TFLOPS, far above the T400’s 1,094.4 GFLOPS.

Neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores, so both are raster and compute only. The T400’s memory type is GDDR6, while the GTX 780 uses GDDR5. The T400 runs its memory at 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective), while the GTX 780 runs at 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective). The T400’s higher data rate per pin does not compensate for its narrow 64-bit bus, which is why its bandwidth is so much lower. The T400 is a single-slot card with three mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the GTX 780 is dual-slot with two DVI, one HDMI 1.4a, and one DisplayPort 1.2 output.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every core specification. The GTX 780 has 2,304 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The T400 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The GTX 780’s pixel rate is 43.30 GPixel/s, while the T400’s is 22.80 GPixel/s. The GTX 780’s texture rate is 173.2 GTexel/s, versus the T400’s 34.20 GTexel/s. In every throughput metric, the GTX 780 is multiple times faster.

Memory capacity and bandwidth are also lopsided. The GTX 780 has 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 288.4 GB/s. The T400 has 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 80.00 GB/s. The GTX 780’s base clock is 863 MHz with a boost of 902 MHz, while the T400’s base clock is 420 MHz with a boost of 1425 MHz. The T400’s boost clock is higher by 523 MHz, but that does not close the resource gap.

Power and physical dimensions favor the T400. The T400 has a 30 W TDP, is single-slot, and requires no power connectors. The GTX 780 has a 250 W TDP, is dual-slot, and needs a 6-pin and an 8-pin connector. The GTX 780’s suggested power supply is 600 W, while the T400’s is 200 W. The GTX 780 measures 267 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 38 mm in width; the T400 has no recorded dimensions. The GTX 780 launched with an MSRP of 649 USD, while the T400 has no launch MSRP in the database. Both cards use PCIe 3.0 x16 and support OpenGL 4.6.