FirePro M7740 vs GeForce GTX 295
If you are going to buy a new graphics card and are choosing between FirePro M7740 and GeForce GTX 295, there are a couple of things to consider. Cards with more VRAM in general perform better and allow you to play on higher graphics settings. Size also makes a difference. A model with a large heatsink can occupy up to three expansion slots on a motherboard. Be sure you have enough room in your PC case. When comparing GPUs with different architectures, more processing cores and even higher TFLOPS will not always translate to better performance. To help you decide which GPU you need, we have measured frame rates in a number of popular games. For more on how the FirePro M7740 stacks up against GeForce GTX 295, check out specs charts below.
GeForce GTX 295
FirePro M7740 is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: FirePro M7740 is only used in laptop graphics. It has lower GPU clock speed compared to the desktop variant, which results in lower power consumption, but also 10-30% lower gaming performance. Check available laptop models with FirePro M7740 here:
Main Specs
| FirePro M7740 | GeForce GTX 295 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 60 Watt | 289 Watt |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 6-pin & 8-pin |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 1792 MB |
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI |
| Check Price |
- GeForce GTX 295 has 381% more power consumption, than FirePro M7740.
- Both video cards are using PCIe 2.0 x16 interface connection to a motherboard.
- GeForce GTX 295 has 1791 GB more memory, than FirePro M7740.
- FirePro M7740 is used in Mobile workstations, and GeForce GTX 295 - in Desktops.
- FirePro M7740 is build with Terascale 1 architecture, and GeForce GTX 295 - with Tesla 2.0.
- Core clock speed of GeForce GTX 295 is 592 MHz higher, than FirePro M7740.
- FirePro M7740 is manufactured by 40 nm process technology, and GeForce GTX 295 - by 55 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of FirePro M7740 is 1 MHz higher, than GeForce GTX 295.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 6−7 | 3−4 |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 2−3 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 16−18 | 14−16 |
| medium / 1080p | 8−9 | 5−6 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M7740 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 50% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 12−14 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 10−11 | 7−8 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 24−27 | 18−20 |
| medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 8−9 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M7740 in Battlefield 5 is 45% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
| high / 1080p | 45−50 | 30−35 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M7740 in Call of Duty: Warzone is 17% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 130−140 | 120−130 |
| medium / 768p | 110−120 | 90−95 |
| ultra / 1080p | 50−55 | 40−45 |
| QHD / 1440p | 27−30 | 24−27 |
| 4K / 2160p | 27−30 | 18−20 |
| high / 768p | 80−85 | 65−70 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M7740 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 17% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 55−60 | 80−85 |
| ultra / 1080p | 18−20 | 14−16 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 40−45 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 295 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 12% more, than FirePro M7740. | ||
| low / 768p | 80−85 | 75−80 |
| medium / 768p | 55−60 | 50−55 |
| ultra / 1080p | 30−35 | 27−30 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M7740 in Dota 2 is 9% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 8−9 | 5−6 |
| ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 3−4 | 2−3 |
| low / 720p | 18−20 | 14−16 |
| medium / 1080p | 8−9 | 6−7 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M7740 in Far Cry 5 is 28% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 14−16 | 12−14 |
| ultra / 1080p | 10−11 | 7−8 |
| low / 720p | 60−65 | 50−55 |
| medium / 1080p | 21−24 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M7740 in Fortnite is 22% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 12−14 | 7−8 |
| ultra / 1080p | 10−12 | − |
| QHD / 1440p | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 24−27 | 20−22 |
| medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 9−10 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M7740 in Forza Horizon 4 is 41% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 45−50 |
| medium / 768p | 45−50 | − |
| high / 1080p | 12−14 | 8−9 |
| ultra / 1080p | 6−7 | 5−6 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| medium / 720p | − | 40−45 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M7740 in Grand Theft Auto V is 20% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 4−5 | 3−4 |
| ultra / 1080p | 3−4 | 1−2 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 12−14 | 8−9 |
| medium / 1080p | 6−7 | 4−5 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M7740 in Metro Exodus is 50% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 95−100 | 85−90 |
| high / 1080p | 85−90 | 85−90 |
| ultra / 1080p | 80−85 | 80−85 |
| medium / 1080p | 90−95 | 85−90 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M7740 in Minecraft is 4% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 16−18 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 12−14 |
| low / 720p | 30−35 | 27−30 |
| medium / 1080p | 18−20 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M7740 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 22% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 7−8 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 12−14 | 8−9 |
| medium / 1080p | 10−12 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M7740 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 25% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 24−27 | 16−18 |
| medium / 768p | 16−18 | 12−14 |
| high / 1080p | 9−10 | 6−7 |
| ultra / 1080p | 6−7 | 5−6 |
| 4K / 2160p | 6−7 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M7740 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 40% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 85−90 | 70−75 |
| medium / 768p | 45−50 | 35−40 |
| ultra / 1080p | 18−20 | 16−18 |
| high / 768p | 35−40 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M7740 in World of Tanks is 20% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
Full Specs
| FirePro M7740 | GeForce GTX 295 | |
| Architecture | Terascale 1 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Code name | RV740 | GT200B |
| Type | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 4 August 2009 | 8 January 2009 |
| Pipelines | 640 | 240 |
| Core clock speed | 650 MHz | 1242 MHz |
| Transistor count | 826 million | 1,400 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 55 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 20.80 | 92.2 billion/sec |
| Floating-point performance | 832.0 gflops | 2x 596.2 gflops |
| Length | 10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm) | |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 896 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1000 MHz | 999 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 54.14 GB/s | 223.8 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | + | |
| CUDA cores | 480 | |
| Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | |
| SLI options | + | |
| Multi monitor support | + | |
| HDMI | + | |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
| Audio input for HDMI | S/PDIF | |
| Laptop size | large | |
| CUDA cores per GPU | 240 | |
| Standard memory config per GPU | 896 MB | |
| Memory interface width per GPU | 448 Bit | |
| High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR) | 128bit | |
| Check Price |