Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
GeForce GTX 750 vs 560 Ti 448
Aggregated performance score
GTX 560 Ti 448
2011
1280 MB GDDR5
8.16
GTX 750
2014
4096 MB GDDR5
8.67
+6.3%
750 outperforms 560 Ti 448 by 6% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 475 | 459 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 62 |
| Value for money | 0.40 | 0.83 |
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) | Maxwell (2014−2018) |
| GPU code name | GF110 | GM107 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 29 November 2011 (12 years old) | 18 February 2014 (10 years old) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $289 | $119 |
| Current price | $624 (2.2x MSRP) | $340 (2.9x MSRP) |
Value for money
GTX 750 has 108% better value for money than GTX 560 Ti 448.
Technical specs
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 cores | 448 | 512 |
| CUDA cores | no data | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 732 MHz | 1020 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1085 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,000 million | 1,870 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 210 Watt | 55 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | no data | 95 °C |
| Texture fill rate | 40.99 | 34.72 |
| Floating-point performance | 1,311.7 gflops | 1,111 gflops |
Size and 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 support | no data | PCI Express 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | 5.7" (14.5 cm) |
| Height | no data | 4.376" (11.1 cm) |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 6-pin | None |
Memory
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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1280 MB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 320 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 3800 MHz | 5.0 GB/s |
| Memory bandwidth | 152.0 GB/s | 80 GB/s |
Video outputs and ports
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 Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI | One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One mini-HDMI |
| Multi monitor support | no data | 3 displays |
| HDMI | + | + |
| HDCP | no data | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
| Audio input for HDMI | no data | Internal |
Technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Blu Ray 3D | no data | + |
| 3D Gaming | no data | + |
| 3D Vision | no data | + |
| 3D Vision Live | no data | + |
API support
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | 2.0 | + |
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.
750 outperforms 560 Ti 448 by 6% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
560 Ti 448 outperforms 750 by 6% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Advantages and disadvantages
| Performance score | 8.16 | 8.67 |
| Recency | 29 November 2011 | 18 February 2014 |
| Cost | $289 | $119 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1280 MB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 210 Watt | 55 Watt |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 and GeForce GTX 750.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar GPU comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
