GeForce GT 740 vs Quadro K2000D

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K2000D with GeForce GT 740, including specs and performance data.

K2000D
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 51 Watt
4.11
+7%

K2000D outperforms GT 740 by a small 7% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking689702
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.360.19
Power efficiency5.624.18
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGK107GK107
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date1 March 2013 (11 years ago)29 May 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$599 $89

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

K2000D has 89% better value for money than GT 740.

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 speed954 MHz993 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)51 Watt64 Watt
Texture fill rate30.5331.78
Floating-point processing power0.7327 TFLOPS0.7626 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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length202 mm145 mm
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-pin

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth64 GB/s80.19 GB/s

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x mini-DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+1.1.126
CUDA3.03.0

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.

K2000D 4.11
+7%
GT 740 3.84

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.

K2000D 1586
+6.9%
GT 740 1483

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.

K2000D 3973
GT 740 4374
+10.1%

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.

K2000D 12
+20%
GT 740 10

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.11 3.84
Recency 1 March 2013 29 May 2014
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 51 Watt 64 Watt

K2000D has a 7% higher aggregate performance score, and 25.5% lower power consumption.

GT 740, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro K2000D and GeForce GT 740.

Be aware that Quadro K2000D is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GT 740 is a desktop 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 Quadro K2000D
Quadro K2000D
NVIDIA GeForce GT 740
GeForce GT 740

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.


3.6 14 votes

Rate Quadro K2000D on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 1165 votes

Rate GeForce GT 740 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.