Quadro K2000M vs GeForce GT 730M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 730M with Quadro K2000M, including specs and performance data.

GT 730M
2013
2 GB DDR3, 33 Watt
2.11

K2000M outperforms GT 730M by a significant 24% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking863808
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.30
Power efficiency4.433.30
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGK107GK107
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date20 January 2013 (11 years ago)1 June 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$265.27

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 cores384384
Core clock speed725 MHz745 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)33 Watt55 Watt
Texture fill rate23.2023.84
Floating-point processing power0.5568 TFLOPS0.5722 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs3232

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 sizedmedium sized
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0, PCI Express 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)

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 typeDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Standard memory configurationDDR3/GDDR5no data
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth28.8 GB/s28.8 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 outputsNo outputs
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 content protection+-
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+-
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
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.11.2
Vulkan1.1.126+
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.

GT 730M 2.11
K2000M 2.62
+24.2%

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.

GT 730M 814
K2000M 1012
+24.3%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GT 730M 1722
K2000M 1798
+4.4%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GT 730M 6788
K2000M 7947
+17.1%

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.

GT 730M 1061
+1.4%
K2000M 1046

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.

GT 730M 7152
K2000M 8766
+22.6%

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.

GT 730M 3248
+6.1%
K2000M 3061

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.

GT 730M 3025
+15.6%
K2000M 2616

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.

GT 730M 2459
+3.1%
K2000M 2385

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

GT 730M 14
K2000M 17
+20.6%

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.

GT 730M 6
K2000M 9
+50%

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 HD21
−14.3%
24
+14.3%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data11.05

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Battlefield 5 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−44.4%
12−14
+44.4%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−16.7%
21−24
+16.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−5.6%
35−40
+5.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Battlefield 5 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−44.4%
12−14
+44.4%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−16.7%
21−24
+16.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−8.3%
12−14
+8.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−5.6%
35−40
+5.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−44.4%
12−14
+44.4%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−16.7%
21−24
+16.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−8.3%
12−14
+8.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−5.6%
35−40
+5.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Hitman 3 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
−25%
14−16
+25%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 1−2
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

This is how GT 730M and K2000M compete in popular games:

  • K2000M is 14% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the K2000M is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • K2000M is ahead in 37 tests (66%)
  • there's a draw in 19 tests (34%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.11 2.62
Recency 20 January 2013 1 June 2012
Power consumption (TDP) 33 Watt 55 Watt

GT 730M has an age advantage of 7 months, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

K2000M, on the other hand, has a 24.2% higher aggregate performance score.

The Quadro K2000M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 730M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 730M is a notebook graphics card while Quadro K2000M is a mobile workstation 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 GT 730M
GeForce GT 730M
NVIDIA Quadro K2000M
Quadro K2000M

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.


3.4 257 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 33 votes

Rate Quadro K2000M 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.