A10G vs GeForce GT 755M SLI

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 755M SLI with A10G, including specs and performance data.

GT 755M SLI
2013
2x 2 GB GDDR5, 2 Watt
8.05

A10G outperforms 755M SLI by a whopping 305% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking570188
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency6.2316.83
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Ampere (2020−2025)
GPU code nameN14P-?GA102
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date1 November 2013 (12 years ago)12 April 2021 (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. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores7689216
Core clock speed980 MHz1320 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1710 MHz
Number of transistors2x 1300 Million28,300 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)2x ~50 Watt150 Watt
Texture fill rateno data492.5
Floating-point processing powerno data31.52 TFLOPS
ROPsno data96
TMUsno data288
Tensor Coresno data288
Ray Tracing Coresno data72
L1 Cacheno data9 MB
L2 Cacheno data6 MB

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 sizelargeno data
Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data8-pin EPS

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2x 2 GB12 GB
Memory bus width2x 128 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed5400 MHz1563 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data600.2 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX1112 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.6
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.2
CUDA+8.6
DLSS-+

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 HD36
−289%
140−150
+289%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 40−45
−305%
170−180
+305%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−282%
65−70
+282%
Palworld 18−20
−295%
75−80
+295%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 14−16
−300%
60−65
+300%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 35−40
−289%
140−150
+289%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
−305%
170−180
+305%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−282%
65−70
+282%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−285%
100−105
+285%
Fortnite 45−50
−288%
190−200
+288%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−289%
140−150
+289%
Palworld 18−20
−295%
75−80
+295%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
−279%
110−120
+279%
Valorant 80−85
−266%
300−310
+266%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 35−40
−289%
140−150
+289%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
−305%
170−180
+305%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
−294%
500−550
+294%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−282%
65−70
+282%
Dota 2 60−65
−293%
240−250
+293%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−285%
100−105
+285%
Fortnite 45−50
−288%
190−200
+288%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−289%
140−150
+289%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
−279%
110−120
+279%
Metro Exodus 16−18
−275%
60−65
+275%
Palworld 18−20
−295%
75−80
+295%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
−279%
110−120
+279%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
−305%
85−90
+305%
Valorant 80−85
−266%
300−310
+266%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40
−289%
140−150
+289%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−282%
65−70
+282%
Dota 2 60−65
−293%
240−250
+293%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−285%
100−105
+285%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−289%
140−150
+289%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
−279%
110−120
+279%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
−305%
85−90
+305%
Valorant 80−85
−266%
300−310
+266%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 45−50
−288%
190−200
+288%
Palworld 18−20
−295%
75−80
+295%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−300%
60−65
+300%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 60−65
−303%
250−260
+303%
Grand Theft Auto V 10−11
−300%
40−45
+300%
Metro Exodus 8−9
−275%
30−33
+275%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−286%
170−180
+286%
Valorant 80−85
−261%
300−310
+261%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 18−20
−289%
70−75
+289%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−300%
24−27
+300%
Far Cry 5 16−18
−282%
65−70
+282%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−295%
75−80
+295%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−264%
40−45
+264%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 16−18
−282%
65−70
+282%
Palworld 10−12
−264%
40−45
+264%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
−295%
75−80
+295%
Metro Exodus 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
Palworld 4−5
−300%
16−18
+300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−275%
30−33
+275%
Valorant 35−40
−300%
140−150
+300%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 9−10
−289%
35−40
+289%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
Dota 2 30−33
−300%
120−130
+300%
Far Cry 5 8−9
−275%
30−33
+275%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−285%
50−55
+285%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−275%
30−33
+275%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 8−9
−275%
30−33
+275%
Palworld 4−5
−300%
16−18
+300%

This is how GT 755M SLI and A10G compete in popular games:

  • A10G is 289% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.05 32.64
Recency 1 November 2013 12 April 2021
Chip lithography 28 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 2 Watt 150 Watt

GT 755M SLI has 7400% lower power consumption.

A10G, on the other hand, has a 305% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.

The A10G is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 755M SLI in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 755M SLI is a notebook graphics card while A10G is a workstation one.

Other comparisons

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.


4.4 25 votes

Rate GeForce GT 755M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 50 votes

Rate A10G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GT 755M SLI or A10G, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.