UHD Graphics 730 vs GeForce GT 755M

#ad 
Buy
GT 640M GT 645M GT 650M GT 650M Mac Edition GT 730M GT 745M GT 750M GT 750M Mac Edition GT 755M GT 755M Mac Edition GTX 660M GTX 660M Mac Edition
VS
#ad 
Buy
UHD Graphics 710 UHD Graphics 730 UHD Graphics 750 UHD Graphics 770

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 755M with UHD Graphics 730, including specs and performance data.

GT 755M
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 50 Watt
3.82
+6.4%

GT 755M outperforms UHD Graphics 730 by a small 6% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

GT 755M GT 755M
UHD Graphics 730 UHD Graphics 730

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking682703
Place by popularitynot in top-10097
Power efficiency6.0618.98
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Generation 12.2 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameGK107Raptor Lake GT1
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date25 June 2013 (11 years ago)3 January 2023 (2 years ago)

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 cores384192
Core clock speed980 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1550 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate31.3618.60
Floating-point processing power0.7526 TFLOPS0.5952 TFLOPS
ROPs166
TMUs3212

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 sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0, PCI Express 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16Ring Bus
Widthno dataIGP

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Standard memory configurationGDDR5no data
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1350 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth86.4 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 ConnectorsNo outputsMotherboard Dependent
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 compatibility

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

DirectX12 API12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.6
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.13.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.3
CUDA+-

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 755M 3.82
+6.4%
UHD Graphics 730 3.59
  • Passmark

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 755M 1707
+6.5%
UHD Graphics 730 1603

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:

900p56
+12%
50−55
−12%
Full HD22
+22.2%
18−21
−22.2%

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
Atomic Heart 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Atomic Heart 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Battlefield 5 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Fortnite 24−27
+14.3%
21−24
−14.3%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Forza Horizon 5 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
Valorant 55−60
+10%
50−55
−10%
Atomic Heart 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Battlefield 5 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
+12.3%
65−70
−12.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Dota 2 35−40
+23.3%
30−33
−23.3%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Fortnite 24−27
+14.3%
21−24
−14.3%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Forza Horizon 5 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Valorant 55−60
+10%
50−55
−10%
Battlefield 5 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Dota 2 35−40
+23.3%
30−33
−23.3%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Valorant 55−60
+10%
50−55
−10%
Fortnite 24−27
+14.3%
21−24
−14.3%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
+14.8%
27−30
−14.8%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+6.7%
30−33
−6.7%
Valorant 40−45
+10%
40−45
−10%
Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Fortnite 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Atomic Heart 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
Valorant 21−24
+16.7%
18−20
−16.7%
Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Fortnite 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

This is how GT 755M and UHD Graphics 730 compete in popular games:

  • GT 755M is 12% faster in 900p
  • GT 755M is 22% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 3.82 3.59
Recency 25 June 2013 3 January 2023
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 15 Watt

GT 755M has a 6.4% higher aggregate performance score.

UHD Graphics 730, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 9 years, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GT 755M and UHD Graphics 730.

Be aware that GeForce GT 755M is a notebook card while UHD Graphics 730 is a desktop 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 755M
GeForce GT 755M
Intel UHD Graphics 730
UHD Graphics 730
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

GT 755M GeForce GT 755M
vs
Graphics (Ryzen 7000) Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000)
UHD Graphics 730 UHD Graphics 730
vs
Iris Pro Graphics P6300 Iris Pro Graphics P6300
GT 755M GeForce GT 755M
vs
R9 M275X Radeon R9 M275X
7600 GS AGP GeForce 7600 GS AGP
vs
Vega 7 Radeon Vega 7
8500 GT GeForce 8500 GT
vs
Radeon 780M Radeon 780M
8800 GT GeForce 8800 GT
vs
RTX 4050 Mobile GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile
9600 GT GeForce 9600 GT
vs
RTX 2050 Max-Q GeForce RTX 2050 Max-Q
GTX 280 GeForce GTX 280
vs
RX 7800 XT Radeon RX 7800 XT
GT 120 OEM GeForce GT 120 OEM
vs
GT 120 Mac Edition GeForce GT 120 Mac Edition
GT 230 GeForce GT 230
vs
Radeon 680M Radeon 680M
GT 240 GeForce GT 240
vs
RTX 2080 GeForce RTX 2080
GTX 460 GeForce GTX 460
vs
9600 GTX GeForce 9600 GTX
ATI Graphics Vantage Graphics Vantage
vs
RX 6550M Radeon RX 6550M

Community ratings

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

3.3
79 votes

Rate GeForce GT 755M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5
1362 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 730 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GT 755M or UHD Graphics 730, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.