UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU) vs GeForce GT 740

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 740 with UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU), including specs and performance data.

GT 740
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 64 Watt
3.79
+21.5%

GT 740 outperforms UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU) by a significant 21% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking717762
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.19no data
Power efficiency4.118.66
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code nameGK107Ice Lake G1 Gen. 11
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date29 May 2014 (10 years ago)28 May 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$89 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

no data

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 cores38432
Core clock speed993 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1100 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)64 Watt12-25 Watt
Texture fill rate31.78no data
Floating-point processing power0.7626 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs32no data

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length145 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR5DDR4
Maximum RAM amount4 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1253 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth80.19 GB/sno data
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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMIno data
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12_1
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.1.126-
CUDA3.0-

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.

GT 740 3.79
+21.5%
UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU) 3.12

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.

GT 740 1950
+28.2%
UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU) 1521

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 HD14−16
+7.7%
13
−7.7%
4K10−12
+11.1%
9
−11.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.36no data
4K8.90no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 8
+0%
8
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Battlefield 5 8
+0%
8
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Battlefield 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30
+0%
30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 22
+0%
22
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 7
+0%
7
+0%
Metro Exodus 2
+0%
2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10
+0%
10
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 20
+0%
20
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5
+0%
5
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 9
+0%
9
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how GT 740 and UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU) compete in popular games:

  • GT 740 is 8% faster in 1080p
  • GT 740 is 11% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.79 3.12
Recency 29 May 2014 28 May 2019
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 64 Watt 12 Watt

GT 740 has a 21.5% higher aggregate performance score.

UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 433.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GT 740 is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU) in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 740 is a desktop card while UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU) is a notebook one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GT 740
GeForce GT 740
Intel UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU)
UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU)

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.


3.2 1229 votes

Rate GeForce GT 740 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 374 votes

Rate UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GT 740 or UHD Graphics G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.