GeForce GT 720 vs Quadro 1000M

Place in the ranking	981	954
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.11	0.02
Power efficiency	2.27	5.81
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015)
GPU code name	GF108	GK208B
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	13 January 2011 (13 years ago)	29 September 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$174.95	$49

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro 1000M has 450% better value for money than GT 720.

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 cores	96	192
Core clock speed	700 MHz	797 MHz
Number of transistors	585 million	915 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	45 Watt	19 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	no data	98 °C
Texture fill rate	11.20	12.75
Floating-point processing power	0.2688 TFLOPS	0.306 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	8
TMUs	16	16

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 size	medium sized	no data
Bus support	no data	PCI Express 2.0
Interface	MXM-A (3.0)	PCIe 2.0 x8
Length	no data	145 mm
Height	no data	2.713" (6.9 cm)
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	DDR3	DDR3 / GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1 GB or 1 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	1.8 GBps or 5.0 GB/s
Memory bandwidth	28.8 GB/s	14.4 (DDR3) or 40 (GDDR5)
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	Dual Link DVI-DHDMIVGA
Multi monitor support	no data	3 displays
HDMI	-	+
HDCP	-	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
Audio input for HDMI	no data	Internal

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

3D Blu-Ray	-	+
3D Gaming	-	+
3D Vision	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	5.1	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.4
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.1.126
CUDA	2.1	+

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.

Quadro 1000M 1.47

GT 720 1.59
+8.2%

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.

Quadro 1000M 566

GT 720 613
+8.3%

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.

Quadro 1000M 2113

GT 720 2417
+14.4%

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.

Quadro 1000M 7

GT 720 8
+14.3%

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 HD

−4.7%

45−50
+4.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

4.07

1.09

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5

+0%

4−5
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Hitman 3	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −6.7%	16−18 +6.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −6.1%	35−40 +6.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Hitman 3	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −6.7%	16−18 +6.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −6.1%	35−40 +6.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Hitman 3	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −6.7%	16−18 +6.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −6.1%	35−40 +6.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

+0%

3−4
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Hitman 3	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5

+0%

4−5
+0%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

1−2

+0%

1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	0−1	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

+0%

3−4
+0%

This is how Quadro 1000M and GT 720 compete in popular games:

GT 720 is 5% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.47	1.59
Recency	13 January 2011	29 September 2014
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1 GB or 1 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	45 Watt	19 Watt

Quadro 1000M has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GT 720, on the other hand, has a 8.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 136.8% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro 1000M and GeForce GT 720.

Be aware that Quadro 1000M is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GT 720 is a desktop one.

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