Tesla K40m vs GeForce GT 735M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 735M with Tesla K40m, including specs and performance data.

GT 735M
2013
2 GB DDR3, 33 Watt
1.58
Tesla K40m
2013, $7,699
12 GB GDDR5, 245 Watt
7.54
+377%

K40m outperforms 735M by a whopping 377% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking1014586
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.06
Power efficiency3.702.38
ArchitectureKepler 2.0 (2013−2015)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGK208GK110B
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date1 April 2013 (13 years ago)22 November 2013 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$7,699

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores3842880
Core clock speed575 MHz745 MHz
Boost clock speed889 MHz876 MHz
Number of transistors915 million7,080 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)33 Watt245 Watt
Texture fill rate18.40210.2
Floating-point processing power0.4416 TFLOPS5.046 TFLOPS
ROPs848
TMUs32240
L1 Cache32 KB240 KB
L2 Cache128 KB1536 KB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB12 GB
Standard memory configurationDDR3no data
Memory bus width64 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s288.4 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
eDP 1.2 signal supportUp to 3840x2160no data
LVDS signal supportUp to 1920x1200no data
VGA аnalog display supportUp to 2048x1536no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportUp to 3840x2160no data
HDMI+-
HDCP content protection+-
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI+-
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Blu-Ray 3D Support+-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+-
Optimus+-
3D Vision / 3DTV Play+-

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 API12 (11_1)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.11.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.1.126
CUDA+3.5

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

GT 735M 1.58
Tesla K40m 7.54
+377%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GT 735M 659
Samples: 157
Tesla K40m 3143
+377%
Samples: 4

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

900p17
−371%
80−85
+371%
Full HD21
−376%
100−110
+376%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data76.99

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Palworld 5−6
−320%
21−24
+320%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 0−1 0−1

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Fortnite 6−7
−350%
27−30
+350%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−344%
40−45
+344%
Palworld 5−6
−320%
21−24
+320%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
−350%
45−50
+350%
Valorant 35−40
−357%
160−170
+357%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 32
−369%
150−160
+369%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Dota 2 18−20
−374%
90−95
+374%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Fortnite 6−7
−350%
27−30
+350%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−344%
40−45
+344%
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%
Palworld 5−6
−320%
21−24
+320%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
−350%
45−50
+350%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−338%
35−40
+338%
Valorant 35−40
−357%
160−170
+357%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Dota 2 18−20
−374%
90−95
+374%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−344%
40−45
+344%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
−350%
45−50
+350%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−338%
35−40
+338%
Valorant 35−40
−357%
160−170
+357%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 6−7
−350%
27−30
+350%
Palworld 5−6
−320%
21−24
+320%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 10−12
−355%
50−55
+355%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−369%
75−80
+369%
Valorant 9−10
−344%
40−45
+344%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%
Palworld 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−367%
70−75
+367%
Valorant 9−10
−344%
40−45
+344%

4K
Ultra

Dota 2 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%

This is how GT 735M and Tesla K40m compete in popular games:

  • Tesla K40m is 371% faster in 900p
  • Tesla K40m is 376% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.58 7.54
Recency 1 April 2013 22 November 2013
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 12 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 33 Watt 245 Watt

GT 735M has 642% lower power consumption.

Tesla K40m, on the other hand, has a 377% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 months, and a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The Tesla K40m is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 735M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 735M is a notebook graphics card while Tesla K40m is a workstation one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.7 35 votes

Rate GeForce GT 735M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.6 21 votes

Rate Tesla K40m on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GT 735M or Tesla K40m, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.