Quadro K2100M vs GeForce GT 750M

#ad
Buy
VS

Combined performance score

GT 750M
3.41

Quadro K2100M outperforms GeForce GT 750M by 3% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking687681
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money0.140.56
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameN14P-GTGK106
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date1 April 2013 (10 years old)23 July 2013 (10 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$84.95
Current price$1119 $208 (2.4x MSRP)
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

K2100M has 300% better value for money than GT 750M.

Technical specs

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 cores384576
Core clock speed967 MHz667 MHz
Boost clock speed967 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,270 million2,540 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt55 Watt
Texture fill rate30.9432.02
Floating-point performance742.7 gflops768.4 gflops

Size and compatibility

Information on GeForce GT 750M and Quadro K2100M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. 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 sizemedium sizedmedium sized
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)

Memory

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 amount4 GB2 GB
Standard memory configurationDDR3/GDDR5no data
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 - 5000 MHz3000 MHz
Memory bandwidth64.19 GB/s48.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

Video outputs and ports

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 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+no data
HDCP content protection+no data
Display Portno data1.2
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI+no data
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming+no data

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++
3D Vision / 3DTV Play+no data
3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+

API support

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

DirectX12 API12
Shader Model5.15
OpenGL4.54.5
OpenCL1.11.2
Vulkan1.1.126+
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 750M 3.41
K2100M 3.51
+2.9%

Quadro K2100M outperforms GeForce GT 750M by 3% in our combined 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 750M 1323
K2100M 1362
+2.9%

Quadro K2100M outperforms GeForce GT 750M by 3% in Passmark.

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GT 750M 9618
K2100M 10648
+10.7%

Quadro K2100M outperforms GeForce GT 750M by 11% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GT 750M 2543
+6.2%
K2100M 2394

GeForce GT 750M outperforms Quadro K2100M by 6% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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 750M 1574
K2100M 1606
+2%

Quadro K2100M outperforms GeForce GT 750M by 2% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GT 750M 10822
K2100M 11835
+9.4%

Quadro K2100M outperforms GeForce GT 750M by 9% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

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 750M 4267
K2100M 4450
+4.3%

Quadro K2100M outperforms GeForce GT 750M by 4% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

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 Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 5%

GT 750M 3874
K2100M 4195
+8.3%

Quadro K2100M outperforms GeForce GT 750M by 8% in GeekBench 5 Vulkan.

GeekBench 5 CUDA

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 CUDA API by NVIDIA.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GT 750M 3118
+3%
K2100M 3028

GeForce GT 750M outperforms Quadro K2100M by 3% in GeekBench 5 CUDA.

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GT 750M 22
K2100M 23
+4%

Quadro K2100M outperforms GeForce GT 750M by 4% in Unigine Heaven 3.0.

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 750M 12
+9.1%
K2100M 11

GeForce GT 750M outperforms Quadro K2100M by 9% 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 HD21
−14.3%
24
+14.3%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Battlefield 5 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Battlefield 5 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9
+0%
9
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Battlefield 5 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5
−60%
8−9
+60%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Hitman 3 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 1−2
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
High Preset

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

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 1−2

This is how GT 750M and K2100M compete in popular games:

1080p resolution:

  • K2100M is 14.3% faster than GT 750M

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the K2100M is 60% faster than the GT 750M.

All in all, in popular games:

  • K2100M is ahead in 8 tests (14%)
  • there's a draw in 49 tests (86%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 3.41 3.51
Recency 1 April 2013 23 July 2013
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 55 Watt

We couldn't decide between GeForce GT 750M and Quadro K2100M. The differences in performance seem too small.

Be aware that GeForce GT 750M is a notebook graphics card while Quadro K2100M 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.

User ratings

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


NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M
GeForce GT 750M
NVIDIA Quadro K2100M
Quadro K2100M

Similar GPU comparisons

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

User ratings: view and submit

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


3.4 502 votes

Rate NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 232 votes

Rate NVIDIA Quadro K2100M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.