GeForce GT 730 vs Radeon R8 M365DX

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R8 M365DX with GeForce GT 730, including specs and performance data.

R8 M365DX
2015
1.54

GT 730 outperforms R8 M365DX by a significant 28% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking989918
Place by popularitynot in top-10031
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.19
Power efficiencyno data3.07
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameMesoGF108
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date3 June 2015 (10 years ago)18 June 2014 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$59.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores38496
Core clock speed900 MHz700 MHz
Boost clock speed1125 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,550 million585 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data49 Watt
Texture fill rate27.0011.2 GT/s
Floating-point processing power0.864 TFLOPS0.2688 TFLOPS
ROPs84
TMUs2416

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
InterfaceIGPPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data145 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeSystem SharedDDR3
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared2 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared900 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data25.6 GB/s
Shared memory+no data

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputs1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMI-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.05.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
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.

R8 M365DX 1.54
GT 730 1.97
+27.9%

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.

R8 M365DX 647
GT 730 824
+27.4%

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.

R8 M365DX 1902
+62.6%
GT 730 1170

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 HD14
−14.3%
16−18
+14.3%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.75

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Fortnite 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
−20%
12−14
+20%
Valorant 35−40
−14.3%
40−45
+14.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 44
−25%
55−60
+25%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
−26.3%
24−27
+26.3%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Fortnite 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
−20%
12−14
+20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Valorant 35−40
−14.3%
40−45
+14.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
−26.3%
24−27
+26.3%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
−20%
12−14
+20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Valorant 35−40
−14.3%
40−45
+14.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 10−11
−20%
12−14
+20%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−12.5%
18−20
+12.5%
Valorant 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−20%
18−20
+20%
Valorant 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%

4K
Ultra Preset

Dota 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how R8 M365DX and GT 730 compete in popular games:

  • GT 730 is 14% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.54 1.97
Recency 3 June 2015 18 June 2014
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm

R8 M365DX has an age advantage of 11 months, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GT 730, on the other hand, has a 27.9% higher aggregate performance score.

The GeForce GT 730 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R8 M365DX in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R8 M365DX is a notebook graphics card while GeForce GT 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.


AMD Radeon R8 M365DX
Radeon R8 M365DX
NVIDIA GeForce GT 730
GeForce GT 730

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.


2 9 votes

Rate Radeon R8 M365DX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 6884 votes

Rate GeForce GT 730 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R8 M365DX or GeForce GT 730, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.