Winner
Nvidia GeForce GT 740M
GPUBoss recommends the Nvidia GeForce GT 740M based on its benchmarks and compute performance.
See full details Mobility Radeon HD 5470 vs GeForce GT 740M |
VS
Released April, 2013
Nvidia GeForce GT 740M
- 810 MHz
- 2 GB DDR3
6.1 Out of 10
by hassan-mujtaba (May, 2014)The core clock is maintained at 993 MHz for the reference models but comes with boost clock which has been absent on the GK107 chips.
GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 5470 vs 740M among Laptop GPUs
Gaming | |
| | |
| Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 21 more | |
Graphics | |
| | |
| T-Rex, Manhattan, Cloud Gate Factor, Sky Diver Factor and 1 more | |
Computing | |
| | |
| Face Detection, Ocean Surface Simulation and 3 more | |
Performance per Watt | |
| | |
| Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more | |
Value | |
| | |
| Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more | |
Noise and Power | |
| | |
| TDP, Idle Power Consumption, Load Power Consumption and 2 more | |
| 6.5 | Overall Score |
| | |
 | Winner |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with GPUBoss?
VS
| |  | Nvidia GeForce GT 740MGPUBoss Winner |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Higher effective memory clock speed | 3,200 MHz | vs | 1,802 MHz | Around 80% higher effective memory clock speed | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Slightly better 3DMark 11 graphics score | 3,683.5 | vs | 1,873 | More than 95% better 3DMark 11 graphics score | |||
| Lower TDP | 15W | vs | 45W | 3x lower TDP | |||
| |||||||
| Much better 3DMark06 score | 10,161 | vs | 3,683.5 | More than 2.8x better 3DMark06 score | |||
| Better PassMark score | 772 | vs | 234 | More than 3.2x better PassMark score | |||
| Better 3DMark vantage graphics score | 5,459 | vs | 999.5 | Around 5.5x better 3DMark vantage graphics score | |||
| More memory | 2,048 MB | vs | 512 MB | 4x more memory | |||
| Slightly higher clock speed | 810 MHz | vs | 750 MHz | Around 10% higher clock speed | |||
| Significantly better manhattan score | 2,901.63 | vs | 1,376.83 | More than 2x better manhattan score | |||
| Slightly better floating-point performance | 622.1 GFLOPS | vs | 120 GFLOPS | Around 5.2x better floating-point performance | |||
| Higher texture rate | 25.92 GTexel/s | vs | 6 GTexel/s | More than 4.2x higher texture rate | |||
| More render output processors | 16 | vs | 4 | 12 more render output processors | |||
| More texture mapping units | 32 | vs | 8 | 24 more texture mapping units | |||
| Wider memory bus | 128 bit | vs | 64 bit | 2x wider memory bus | |||
| More shading units | 384 | vs | 80 | 304 more shading units | |||
| Better PassMark direct compute score | 723 | vs | 101 | Around 7.2x better PassMark direct compute score | |||
| Higher memory clock speed | 901 MHz | vs | 800 MHz | Around 15% higher memory clock speed | |||
Report a correction
