GeForce GT 730 vs Radeon R9 M385X

Place in the ranking	617	856
Place by popularity	not in top-100	34
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.19
Power efficiency	no data	3.05
Architecture	GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)	Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code name	Strato	GF108
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	5 May 2015 (9 years ago)	18 June 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$59.99

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 cores	896	96
Core clock speed	1000 MHz	700 MHz
Boost clock speed	1100 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	2,080 million	585 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	no data	49 Watt
Texture fill rate	61.60	11.2 GT/s
Floating-point processing power	1.971 TFLOPS	0.2688 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	4
TMUs	56	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	large	no data
Bus support	PCIe 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	145 mm
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	GDDR5	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1500 MHz	900 MHz
Memory bandwidth	76.8 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
Eyefinity	+	-
HDMI	-	+

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync	+	-
HD3D	+	-
PowerTune	+	-
DualGraphics	+	-
ZeroCore	+	-
Switchable graphics	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	DirectX® 12	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	6.3	5.1
OpenGL	4.4	4.6
OpenCL	Not Listed	1.1
Vulkan	-	N/A
Mantle	+	-
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.

R9 M385X 5.17
+139%

GT 730 2.16

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.

R9 M385X 1993
+139%

GT 730 835

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.

R9 M385X 3405
+191%

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 HD

26
+160%

10−12

−160%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

6.00

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	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
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	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +175%	12−14 −175%
Hitman 3	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +175%	12−14 −175%
Metro Exodus	12−14 +140%	5−6 −140%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +161%	18−20 −161%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
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	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +175%	12−14 −175%
Hitman 3	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +175%	12−14 −175%
Metro Exodus	12−14 +140%	5−6 −140%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	41 +156%	16−18 −156%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +161%	18−20 −161%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
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	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +175%	12−14 −175%
Hitman 3	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +175%	12−14 −175%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +161%	18−20 −161%

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	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3	0−1
Far Cry 5	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +140%	5−6 −140%
Hitman 3	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	30−35 +175%	12−14 −175%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10
+200%

3−4

−200%

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 +167%	3−4 −167%
Metro Exodus	2−3	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
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
+200%

2−3

−200%

This is how R9 M385X and GT 730 compete in popular games:

R9 M385X is 160% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	5.17	2.16
Recency	5 May 2015	18 June 2014
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	40 nm

R9 M385X has a 139.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 months, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R9 M385X is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 730 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 M385X is a notebook card while GeForce GT 730 is a desktop one.

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