GeForce GT 750M vs GTX 295

Aggregate performance score

GTX 295
2009
1792 MB GDDR3, 289 Watt
3.12

GT 750M outperforms GTX 295 by a moderate 10% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking717692
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.170.15
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGT200BN14P-GT
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date8 January 2009 (15 years ago)1 April 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$500 no data
Current price$200 (0.4x MSRP)$1119

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 295 has 13% better value for money than GT 750M.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores240384
CUDA cores480no data
CUDA cores per GPU240no data
Core clock speed576 MHz967 MHz
Boost clock speedno data967 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)289 Watt50 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate92.2 billion/sec30.94
Floating-point performance2x 596.2 gflops742.7 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 295 and GeForce GT 750M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
Bus supportno dataPCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm)no data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors6-pin & 8-pinno data
SLI options+no data

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 typeGDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount1792 MB4 GB
Standard memory configurationno dataDDR3/GDDR5
Standard memory config per GPU896 MBno data
Memory bus width896 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed999 MHz2000 - 5000 MHz
Memory bandwidth223.8 GB/s64.19 GB/s
Memory interface width per GPU448 Bitno data
Shared memoryno data-

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 ConnectorsTwo Dual Link DVIHDMINo outputs
Multi monitor support+no data
eDP 1.2 signal supportno dataUp to 3840x2160
LVDS signal supportno dataUp to 1920x1200
VGA аnalog display supportno dataUp to 2048x1536
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportno dataUp to 3840x2160
HDMI++
HDCP content protectionno data+
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMIno data+
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreamingno data+

Supported technologies

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

High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR)128bitno data
Blu-Ray 3D Supportno data+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoderno data+
Optimusno data+
3D Vision / 3DTV Playno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 API
Shader Model4.05.1
OpenGL2.14.5
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/A1.1.126
CUDA++

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

GTX 295 3.12
GT 750M 3.43
+9.9%

GT 750M outperforms GTX 295 by 10% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GTX 295 1206
GT 750M 1327
+10%

GT 750M outperforms GTX 295 by 10% in Passmark.

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 HD18−20
−16.7%
21
+16.7%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.12 3.43
Recency 8 January 2009 1 April 2013
Maximum RAM amount 1792 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 289 Watt 50 Watt

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 295 and GeForce GT 750M.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 295 is a desktop card while GeForce GT 750M is a notebook 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.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295
GeForce GTX 295
NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M
GeForce GT 750M

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.


3.9 77 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 295 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 517 votes

Rate GeForce GT 750M 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.