Quadro T2000 Mobile vs Radeon HD 7730M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 7730M with Quadro T2000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

HD 7730M
2012
2 GB DDR3, 25 Watt
2.02

T2000 Mobile outperforms HD 7730M by a whopping 926% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking890265
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency5.5623.75
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameChelseaTU117
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date24 April 2012 (12 years ago)27 May 2019 (5 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 cores5121024
Core clock speed575 MHz1575 MHz
Boost clock speed675 MHz1785 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate21.60114.2
Floating-point processing power0.6912 TFLOPS3.656 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs3264

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
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 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 typeDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth28.8 GB/s128.0 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

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA-7.5

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.

HD 7730M 2.02
T2000 Mobile 20.72
+926%

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.

HD 7730M 777
T2000 Mobile 7985
+928%

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.

HD 7730M 1478
T2000 Mobile 13524
+815%

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 HD17
−900%
170−180
+900%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−725%
30−35
+725%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−557%
45−50
+557%
Battlefield 5 1−2
−6700%
65−70
+6700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−740%
40−45
+740%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−725%
30−35
+725%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−1500%
45−50
+1500%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−1000%
55−60
+1000%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−1488%
120−130
+1488%
Hitman 3 7−8
−486%
40−45
+486%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−450%
95−100
+450%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−1275%
55−60
+1275%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−590%
65−70
+590%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−166%
90−95
+166%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−557%
45−50
+557%
Battlefield 5 1−2
−6700%
65−70
+6700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−740%
40−45
+740%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−725%
30−35
+725%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−1500%
45−50
+1500%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−1000%
55−60
+1000%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−1488%
120−130
+1488%
Hitman 3 7−8
−486%
40−45
+486%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−450%
95−100
+450%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−1275%
55−60
+1275%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−590%
65−70
+590%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−283%
45−50
+283%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−166%
90−95
+166%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−557%
45−50
+557%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−740%
40−45
+740%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−725%
30−35
+725%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−1500%
45−50
+1500%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−1488%
120−130
+1488%
Hitman 3 7−8
−486%
40−45
+486%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−450%
95−100
+450%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−590%
65−70
+590%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−283%
45−50
+283%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−166%
90−95
+166%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−1275%
55−60
+1275%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−1233%
40−45
+1233%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−967%
30−35
+967%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−2200%
21−24
+2200%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1100%
12−14
+1100%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−1100%
24−27
+1100%
Hitman 3 7−8
−243%
24−27
+243%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
−600%
40−45
+600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−2300%
24−27
+2300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
−1000%
120−130
+1000%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−580%
30−35
+580%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−1500%
16−18
+1500%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−1000%
10−12
+1000%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 10−12
Far Cry 5 1−2
−1000%
10−12
+1000%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 9−10

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Hitman 3 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

This is how HD 7730M and T2000 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • T2000 Mobile is 900% 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 T2000 Mobile is 6700% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • T2000 Mobile is ahead in 53 tests (76%)
  • there's a draw in 17 tests (24%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.02 20.72
Recency 24 April 2012 27 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 60 Watt

HD 7730M has 140% lower power consumption.

T2000 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 925.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro T2000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7730M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 7730M is a notebook graphics card while Quadro T2000 Mobile 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.


AMD Radeon HD 7730M
Radeon HD 7730M
NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile
Quadro T2000 Mobile

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.


3.3 28 votes

Rate Radeon HD 7730M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 389 votes

Rate Quadro T2000 Mobile 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.