GeForce GT 710 vs GTX 765M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 765M with GeForce GT 710, including specs and performance data.

GTX 765M
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
5.18
+218%

GTX 765M outperforms GT 710 by a whopping 218% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking617954
Place by popularitynot in top-10083
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.04
Power efficiency4.815.98
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015)
GPU code nameGK106GK208
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date30 May 2013 (11 years ago)27 March 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$34.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores768192
Core clock speed850 MHz954 MHz
Boost clock speed863 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,540 million915 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt19 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data95 °C
Texture fill rate55.2315.26
Floating-point processing power1.326 TFLOPS0.3663 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs6416

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 sizelargeno data
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0, PCI Express 2.0PCI Express 2.0
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 2.0 x8
Lengthno data145 mm
Heightno data2.713" (6.9 cm)
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone
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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Standard memory configurationGDDR5no data
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz1.8 GB/s
Memory bandwidth64.0 GB/s14.4 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 ConnectorsNo outputsDual Link DVI-DHDMIVGA
Multi monitor supportno data3 displays
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-+
HDCP content protection+-
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal
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+-
3D Vision-+
PureVideo-+
PhysX-+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+-
Optimus+-
3D Vision / 3DTV Play+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 API12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.5
OpenCL1.11.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.1.126
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. 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.

GTX 765M 5.18
+218%
GT 710 1.63

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 765M 1997
+219%
GT 710 627

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.

GTX 765M 2479
+162%
GT 710 947

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.

GTX 765M 17616
+142%
GT 710 7270

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.

GTX 765M 7244
+272%
GT 710 1947

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.

GTX 765M 6714
+245%
GT 710 1946

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.

GTX 765M 5514
+263%
GT 710 1519

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.

GTX 765M 19
+217%
GT 710 6

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:

900p51
+219%
16−18
−219%
Full HD39
+388%
8
−388%
1440p12−14
+200%
4
−200%
4K21−24
+200%
7
−200%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data4.37
1440pno data8.75
4Kno data5.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+133%
6−7
−133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+560%
5−6
−560%
Hitman 3 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+106%
16−18
−106%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+100%
9−10
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+38.2%
30−35
−38.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+133%
6−7
−133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+560%
5−6
−560%
Hitman 3 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+106%
16−18
−106%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+260%
5
−260%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+38.2%
30−35
−38.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+133%
6−7
−133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+560%
5−6
−560%
Hitman 3 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+106%
16−18
−106%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+260%
5
−260%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+500%
3
−500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+38.2%
30−35
−38.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Hitman 3 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%
Metro Exodus 3−4 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+313%
8−9
−313%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+125%
4−5
−125%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Hitman 3 1−2 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5
+0%
5
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5
+0%
5
+0%

This is how GTX 765M and GT 710 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 765M is 219% faster in 900p
  • GTX 765M is 388% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 765M is 200% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 765M is 200% faster in 4K

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 765M is 560% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 765M is ahead in 51 test (96%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (4%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.18 1.63
Recency 30 May 2013 27 March 2014
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 19 Watt

GTX 765M has a 217.8% higher aggregate performance score.

GT 710, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 9 months, and 294.7% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 765M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 710 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 765M is a notebook card while GeForce GT 710 is a desktop one.


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

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 765M
GeForce GTX 765M
NVIDIA GeForce GT 710
GeForce GT 710

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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 74 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 765M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 4213 votes

Rate GeForce GT 710 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

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