Quadro P620 vs GeForce GT 740A
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GT 740A with Quadro P620, including specs and performance data.
P620 outperforms GT 740A by a whopping 450% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in the ranking | 937 | 474 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Power efficiency | 3.61 | 16.38 |
Architecture | Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015) | Pascal (2016−2021) |
GPU code name | GK208 | GP107 |
Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
Release date | 26 August 2013 (11 years ago) | 1 February 2018 (7 years ago) |
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 | 384 | 512 |
Core clock speed | 980 MHz | 1177 MHz |
Boost clock speed | no data | 1443 MHz |
Number of transistors | 915 million | 3,300 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 14 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 33 Watt | 40 Watt |
Texture fill rate | 31.36 | 46.18 |
Floating-point processing power | 0.7526 TFLOPS | 1.478 TFLOPS |
ROPs | 8 | 16 |
TMUs | 32 | 32 |
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).
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Length | no data | 145 mm |
Width | no data | IGP |
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 | GDDR5 |
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 2 GB |
Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | 1502 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB/s | 96.13 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 | No outputs |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (12_1) |
Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.4 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
Vulkan | 1.1.126 | 1.2.131 |
CUDA | 3.5 | 6.1 |
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.
- Passmark
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.
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 | 8−9
−488%
| 47
+488%
|
FPS performance in popular games
- Full HD
Low Preset - Full HD
Medium Preset - Full HD
High Preset - Full HD
Ultra Preset - Full HD
Epic Preset - 1440p
High Preset - 1440p
Ultra Preset - 1440p
Epic Preset - 4K
High Preset - 4K
Ultra Preset - 4K
Epic Preset
Atomic Heart | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
Atomic Heart | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
Fortnite | 113
+0%
|
113
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 5 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
Valorant | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
Atomic Heart | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
Dota 2 | 90
+0%
|
90
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
Fortnite | 42
+0%
|
42
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 5 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
Grand Theft Auto V | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
Metro Exodus | 17
+0%
|
17
+0%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 32
+0%
|
32
+0%
|
Valorant | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
Dota 2 | 83
+0%
|
83
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 5 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 17
+0%
|
17
+0%
|
Valorant | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
Fortnite | 29
+0%
|
29
+0%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
Grand Theft Auto V | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
Metro Exodus | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
Valorant | 100−105
+0%
|
100−105
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 5 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
Fortnite | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
Atomic Heart | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Grand Theft Auto V | 20−22
+0%
|
20−22
+0%
|
Metro Exodus | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
Valorant | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Dota 2 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 5 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
Fortnite | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
This is how GT 740A and Quadro P620 compete in popular games:
- Quadro P620 is 488% faster in 1080p
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 67 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
Performance score | 1.71 | 9.40 |
Recency | 26 August 2013 | 1 February 2018 |
Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 33 Watt | 40 Watt |
GT 740A has 21.2% lower power consumption.
Quadro P620, on the other hand, has a 449.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
The Quadro P620 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 740A in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GT 740A is a notebook card while Quadro P620 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.