Radeon 740M vs GeForce GTX 275

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 275 with Radeon 740M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 275
2009
896 MB GDDR3, 219 Watt
3.09

740M outperforms GTX 275 by a whopping 130% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking731519
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.32no data
Power efficiency1.1237.69
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2025)
GPU code nameGT200BPhoenix
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date15 January 2009 (16 years ago)4 January 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$249 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 cores240256
Core clock speed633 MHz800 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2500 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)219 Watt15 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate50.6440.00
Floating-point processing power0.6739 TFLOPS2.56 TFLOPS
ROPs288
TMUs8016
Ray Tracing Coresno data4

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).

Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length267 mmno data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinNone
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount896 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width448 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1134 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth127.0 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 ConnectorsTwo Dual Link DVIPortable Device Dependent
Multi monitor support+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.7
OpenGL3.04.6
OpenCL1.12.1
VulkanN/A1.3
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.

GTX 275 3.09
Radeon 740M 7.10
+130%

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.

GTX 275 1382
Radeon 740M 3176
+130%

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 HD9−10
−133%
21
+133%

Cost per frame, $

1080p27.67no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 31
+0%
31
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 73
+0%
73
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 23
+0%
23
+0%
Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 60
+0%
60
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Fortnite 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 13
+0%
13
+0%
Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 26
+0%
26
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Fortnite 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 29
+0%
29
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

This is how GTX 275 and Radeon 740M compete in popular games:

  • Radeon 740M is 133% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 58 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.09 7.10
Recency 15 January 2009 4 January 2023
Chip lithography 55 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 219 Watt 15 Watt

Radeon 740M has a 129.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 1275% more advanced lithography process, and 1360% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 740M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 275 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 275 is a desktop card while Radeon 740M 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 GTX 275
GeForce GTX 275
AMD Radeon 740M
Radeon 740M

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.


3.7 139 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 275 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 115 votes

Rate Radeon 740M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 275 or Radeon 740M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.