GeForce GT 730 vs GTX 765M

Place in performance ranking	585	823
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.53	0.19
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code name	N14-GE	GF108
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	30 May 2013 (11 years ago)	18 June 2014 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$59.99
Current price	$93	$77 (1.3x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 765M has 179% better value for money than GT 730.

Detailed specifications

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 cores	768	96
CUDA cores	768	no data
Core clock speed	850 MHz	700 MHz
Boost clock speed	863 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	2,540 million	585 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	49 Watt
Texture fill rate	55.23	11.2 GT/s
Floating-point performance	1,326 gflops	268.8 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 765M and GeForce GT 730 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). 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 size	large	no data
Bus support	PCI Express 3.0, PCI Express 2.0	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	145 mm
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None
SLI options	+	no 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 type	GDDR5	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	2 GB
Standard memory configuration	GDDR5	no data
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	2000 MHz	1800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	64.0 GB/s	25.6 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no data

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 Connectors	No outputs	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
eDP 1.2 signal support	Up to 3840x2160	no data
LVDS signal support	Up to 1920x1200	no data
VGA аnalog display support	Up to 2048x1536	no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	Up to 3840x2160	no data
HDMI	+	+
HDCP content protection	+	no data
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI	+	no data
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming	+	no data

Supported 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	+	no data
3D Vision / 3DTV Play	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 API	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	5.1	5.1
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	1.1.126	N/A
CUDA	+	2.1

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.

GTX 765M 5.16
+139%

GT 730 2.16

GTX 765M outperforms GT 730 by 139% based on our aggregated 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%

GTX 765M 1995
+139%

GT 730 834

GTX 765M outperforms GT 730 by 139% in Passmark.

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%

GTX 765M 2479
+112%

GT 730 1170

GTX 765M outperforms GT 730 by 112% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

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%

GTX 765M 7137
+145%

GT 730 2917

GTX 765M outperforms GT 730 by 145% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Benchmark coverage: 5%

GTX 765M 6714
+86.2%

GT 730 3605

GTX 765M outperforms GT 730 by 86% in GeekBench 5 Vulkan.

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GTX 765M 5514
+106%

GT 730 2682

GTX 765M outperforms GT 730 by 106% in GeekBench 5 CUDA.

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%

GTX 765M 19
+90%

GT 730 10

GTX 765M outperforms GT 730 by 90% 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:

900p	51 +143%	21−24 −143%
Full HD	41 +156%	16−18 −156%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

9−10
+200%

3−4

−200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 +150%	4−5 −150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Battlefield 5	12−14 +160%	5−6 −160%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +143%	7−8 −143%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 +160%	5−6 −160%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +171%	7−8 −171%
Hitman 3	12−14 +140%	5−6 −140%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +163%	8−9 −163%
Metro Exodus	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 +143%	7−8 −143%
Watch Dogs: Legion	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 +150%	4−5 −150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Battlefield 5	12−14 +160%	5−6 −160%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +143%	7−8 −143%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 +160%	5−6 −160%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +171%	7−8 −171%
Hitman 3	12−14 +140%	5−6 −140%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +163%	8−9 −163%
Metro Exodus	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 +143%	7−8 −143%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Watch Dogs: Legion	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 +150%	4−5 −150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +143%	7−8 −143%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +171%	7−8 −171%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +163%	8−9 −163%
Metro Exodus	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Watch Dogs: Legion	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

14−16

+180%

5−6
−180%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11 +150%	4−5 −150%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Hitman 3	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3	0−1
Far Cry 5	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 +140%	5−6 −140%
Metro Exodus	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3	0−1

4K
High Preset

Far Cry 5	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Hitman 3	1−2	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	1−2	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Horizon Zero Dawn	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2	0−1