Quadro 2000M vs GeForce GT 740

Place in the ranking	714	895
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.19	0.28
Power efficiency	4.14	2.53
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code name	GK107	GF106
Market segment	Desktop	Mobile workstation
Release date	29 May 2014 (10 years ago)	13 January 2011 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$89	$46.56

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

Quadro 2000M has 47% better value for money than GT 740.

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores	384	192
Core clock speed	993 MHz	550 MHz
Number of transistors	1,270 million	1,170 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	64 Watt	55 Watt
Texture fill rate	31.78	17.60
Floating-point processing power	0.7626 TFLOPS	0.4224 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	32	32

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).

Laptop size	no data	medium sized
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-A (3.0)
Length	145 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	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	GDDR5	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1253 MHz	900 MHz
Memory bandwidth	80.19 GB/s	28.8 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

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	2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI	No outputs
HDMI	+	-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	5.1	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.1.126	N/A
CUDA	3.0	2.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. 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 740 3.71
+90.3%

Quadro 2000M 1.95

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 740 1476
+89.7%

Quadro 2000M 778

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.

GT 740 4280
+25.4%

Quadro 2000M 3414

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.

GT 740 10
+42.9%

Quadro 2000M 7

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

70−75
+89.2%

−89.2%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

1.27
−1%

1.26

+1%

GT 740 and Quadro 2000M have nearly equal cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Metro Exodus	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Dota 2	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Fortnite	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Metro Exodus	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
World of Tanks	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Dota 2	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	0−1	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
World of Tanks	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	0−1	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Valorant	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Fortnite	0−1	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	0−1	0−1
Valorant	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

This is how GT 740 and Quadro 2000M compete in popular games:

GT 740 is 89% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 47 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.71	1.95
Recency	29 May 2014	13 January 2011
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	64 Watt	55 Watt

GT 740 has a 90.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

Quadro 2000M, on the other hand, has 16.4% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GT 740 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 2000M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 740 is a desktop card while Quadro 2000M is a mobile workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.