GeForce GT 740M vs GT 430

Place in performance ranking	926	837
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.05	0.16
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	GF108	N14P-GV2, ...
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	11 October 2010 (13 years ago)	1 March 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$79	no data
Current price	$59 (0.7x MSRP)	$310

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GT 740M has 220% better value for money than GT 430.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	96	384
CUDA cores per GPU	96	no data
Core clock speed	700 MHz	810 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	980 MHz
Number of transistors	585 million	915 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	49 Watt	45 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	98 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	11.2 billion/sec	31.36
Floating-point performance	268.8 gflops	752.6 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GT 430 and GeForce GT 740M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop size	no data	medium sized
Bus support	PCI-E 2.0 x 16	PCI Express 3.0
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x8
Length	5.7" (14.5 cm)	no data
Height	2.713" (6.9 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	no data

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 type	GDDR3	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Standard memory configuration	no data	DDR3/GDDR5
Memory bus width	128 Bit	64/128 Bit
Memory clock speed	800 - 900 MHz (1600 - 1800 data rate)	1600 - 1800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	25.6 - 28.8 GB/s	14.4 GB/s
Shared memory	no data	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors	HDMIVGA (optional)Mini HDMIDual Link DVI	No outputs
eDP 1.2 signal support	no data	Up to 3840x2160
LVDS signal support	no data	Up to 1920x1200
VGA аnalog display support	no data	Up to 2048x1536
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	no data	Up to 3840x2160
HDMI	+	+
HDCP content protection	no data	+
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	Internal	no data
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI	no data	+
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming	no data	+

Supported technologies

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

Blu-Ray 3D Support	no data	+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	no data	+
Optimus	no data	+
3D Vision / 3DTV Play	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 API
Shader Model	5.1	5.1
OpenGL	4.2	4.5
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	N/A	1.1.126
CUDA	+	+

Synthetic benchmark performance

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

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GT 430 1.55

GT 740M 2.04
+31.6%

GT 740M outperforms GT 430 by 32% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GT 430 601

GT 740M 791
+31.6%

GT 740M outperforms GT 430 by 32% in Passmark.

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GT 430 720

GT 740M 1151
+59.8%

GT 740M outperforms GT 430 by 60% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

GT 430 2256

GT 740M 3836
+70%

GT 740M outperforms GT 430 by 70% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GT 430 3

GT 740M 10
+233%

GT 740M outperforms GT 430 by 233% in Octane Render OctaneBench.

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:

Full HD

12−14

−33.3%

16
+33.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5

+0%

4−5

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Battlefield 5	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 −10%	10−12 +10%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	0−1	2−3
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Hitman 3	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −14.3%	8−9 +14.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Battlefield 5	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 −10%	10−12 +10%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	0−1	2−3
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Hitman 3	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Metro Exodus	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −14.3%	8−9 +14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −75%	7 +75%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Battlefield 5	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	0−1	2−3
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 +0%	4 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Hitman 3	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	1−2
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Hitman 3	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	1−2

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	1−2
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

This is how GT 430 and GT 740M compete in popular games:

GT 740M is 33.3% faster than GT 430 in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GT 740M is 200% faster than the GT 430.

All in all, in popular games:

GT 740M is ahead in 24 tests (63%)
there's a draw in 14 tests (37%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.55	2.04
Recency	11 October 2010	1 March 2013
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	49 Watt	45 Watt