GeForce Go 7300 vs GT 740M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 740M and GeForce Go 7300, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GT 740M
2013
2 GB DDR3, 45 Watt
2.07
+1492%

GT 740M outperforms Go 7300 by a whopping 1492% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking8771427
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency4.36no data
ArchitectureKepler 2.0 (2013−2015)Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code nameGK208G72
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date20 June 2013 (11 years ago)1 February 2006 (18 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 cores3847
Core clock speed980 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speed980 MHz350 MHz
Number of transistors915 million112 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Wattno data
Texture fill rate31.361.400
Floating-point processing power0.7526 TFLOPSno data
ROPs82
TMUs324

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
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 1.0 x16

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 typeDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB64 MB
Standard memory configurationDDR3/GDDR5no data
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz350 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s5.6 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 API9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model5.13.0
OpenGL4.52.1
OpenCL1.1N/A
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
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 740M 2.07
+1492%
Go 7300 0.13

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 740M 797
+1433%
Go 7300 52

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 HD150−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 8−9 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+125%
8−9
−125%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+28.6%
27−30
−28.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 8−9 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+125%
8−9
−125%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22
+144%
9−10
−144%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+28.6%
27−30
−28.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 8−9 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+125%
8−9
−125%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4
−125%
9−10
+125%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+28.6%
27−30
−28.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

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

  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GT 740M is 200% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Go 7300 is 125% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GT 740M is ahead in 28 tests (97%)
  • Go 7300 is ahead in 1 test (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.07 0.13
Recency 20 June 2013 1 February 2006
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 64 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 90 nm

GT 740M has a 1492.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GT 740M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce Go 7300 in performance tests.


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 740M
GeForce GT 740M
NVIDIA GeForce Go 7300
GeForce Go 7300

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 1057 votes

Rate GeForce GT 740M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 48 votes

Rate GeForce Go 7300 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.