GeForce GTX 750 Ti vs Radeon RX Vega M GL

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
540X 630 E9173 PCIe RX 540 RX 550 Mobile RX 560 Mobile RX 560X Mobile RX 580 Mobile RX 640 RX Vega M GH RX Vega M GL RX Vega M GL / 870
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
745 OEM 750 750 GM206 750 Ti 750 Ti OEM 750 v2

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega M GL with GeForce GTX 750 Ti, including specs and performance data.

RX Vega M GL
2018
4 GB HBM2, 65 Watt
9.45
+1%

M GL outperforms 750 Ti by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
RX Vega M GL RX Vega M GL
GTX 750 Ti GTX 750 Ti

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking511519
Place by popularitynot in top-10032
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data4.43
Power efficiency11.2512.07
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code namePolaris 22GM107
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date1 February 2018 (8 years ago)18 February 2014 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

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 cores1280640
Core clock speed931 MHz1020 MHz
Boost clock speed1011 MHz1085 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate80.8843.40
Floating-point processing power2.588 TFLOPS1.389 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs8040
L1 Cache320 KB320 KB
L2 Cache1024 KB2 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).

Bus supportno dataPCI Express 3.0
InterfaceIGPPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data145 mm
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeHBM2GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width1024 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed700 MHz5.4 GB/s
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s86.4 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 outputsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One mini-HDMI
Multi monitor supportno data4 displays
HDMI-+
HDCP-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Blu Ray 3D-+
3D Gaming-+
3D Vision-+
3D Vision Live-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.126
CUDA-+

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

RX Vega M GL 9.45
+1%
GTX 750 Ti 9.36

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.

RX Vega M GL 3936
+1%
Samples: 338
GTX 750 Ti 3898
Samples: 24378

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 HD50−55
+0%
50
+0%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.98

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 140−150
+0.7%
140−150
−0.7%
Dota 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Dota 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%

4K
Ultra

Dota 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Palworld 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Palworld 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Palworld 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Palworld 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Valorant 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Palworld 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Palworld 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Epic

Palworld 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

This is how RX Vega M GL and GTX 750 Ti compete in popular games:

  • A tie in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX Vega M GL is 10% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX Vega M GL performs better in 2 tests (3%)
  • there's a draw in 63 tests (97%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 9.45 9.36
Recency 1 February 2018 18 February 2014
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 60 Watt

RX Vega M GL has a 1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

GTX 750 Ti, on the other hand, has 8% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon RX Vega M GL and GeForce GTX 750 Ti.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega M GL is a notebook graphics card while GeForce GTX 750 Ti is a desktop one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

RX Vega M GL Radeon RX Vega M GL
vs
GTX 780M GeForce GTX 780M
GTX 750 Ti GeForce GTX 750 Ti
vs
HD 7850 Radeon HD 7850
RX Vega M GL Radeon RX Vega M GL
vs
GTX 1050 Max-Q GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q
TITAN V TITAN V
vs
RX 9070 9070
Tesla V100 SXM2 Tesla V100 SXM2
vs
A2
UHD Graphics 600 Intel Graphics 600
vs
RTX 2070 2070
UHD Graphics 600 Intel Graphics 600
vs
Iris Xe Graphics 96EU 96EU
RX Vega M GH AMD RX Vega M GH
vs
RTX A400 A400
RX Vega M GL AMD RX Vega M GL
vs
GTX 660 660
RX Vega 11 AMD RX Vega 11
vs
R5 M230 M230
RX Vega 11 AMD RX Vega 11
vs
ATI V5800 V5800
RX Vega 3 Vega 3
vs
RX 7900 GRE 7900 GRE
RTX 5050 5050
vs
RX Vega 3 Vega 3

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.4 25 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega M GL on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 7900 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 750 Ti on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX Vega M GL or GeForce GTX 750 Ti, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.