GeForce GTX 770M vs GTX 750 Ti

Place in the ranking	447	541
Place by popularity	29	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	4.98	4.46
Power efficiency	11.55	6.61
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2017)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	GM107	GK106
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	18 February 2014 (10 years ago)	30 May 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$149	$189.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 750 Ti has 12% better value for money than GTX 770M.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	640	960
Core clock speed	1020 MHz	811 MHz
Boost clock speed	1085 MHz	797 MHz
Number of transistors	1,870 million	2,540 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	60 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	43.40	63.76
Floating-point processing power	1.389 TFLOPS	1.53 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	24
TMUs	40	80

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 size	no data	large
Bus support	PCI Express 3.0	PCI Express 3.0, PCI Express 2.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-B (3.0)
Length	145 mm	no data
Height	4.376" (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	None
SLI options	-	+

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 type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	3 GB
Standard memory configuration	no data	GDDR5
Memory bus width	128 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	5.4 GB/s	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	86.4 GB/s	96.0 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

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 Connectors	One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One mini-HDMI	No outputs
Multi monitor support	4 displays	no data
eDP 1.2 signal support	no data	Up to 3840x2160
LVDS signal support	no data	Up to 1920x1200
VGA аnalog display support	no data	Up to 2048x1536
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	no data	Up to 3840x2160
HDMI	+	+
HDCP	+	-
HDCP content protection	-	+
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	Internal	no data
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI	-	+
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming	-	+

Supported technologies

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

Blu Ray 3D	+	-
Blu-Ray 3D Support	-	+
3D Gaming	+	-
3D Vision	+	-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	-	+
Optimus	-	+
3D Vision / 3DTV Play	-	+
3D Vision Live	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 API
Shader Model	5.1	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.5
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.1.126	1.1.126
CUDA	+	+

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. 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 750 Ti 10.12
+39.8%

GTX 770M 7.24

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.

GTX 750 Ti 3899
+39.7%

GTX 770M 2791

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTX 750 Ti 5378
+10%

GTX 770M 4889

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GTX 750 Ti 21608
+12.5%

GTX 770M 19208

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.

GTX 750 Ti 4294
+28.3%

GTX 770M 3347

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 750 Ti 31349
+33.3%

GTX 770M 23513

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

GTX 750 Ti 11514
+33.1%

GTX 770M 8652

GeekBench 5 CUDA

GTX 750 Ti 12499
+90.2%

GTX 770M 6572

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

GTX 750 Ti 54
+12%

GTX 770M 49

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

GTX 750 Ti 35
+45.8%

GTX 770M 24

Unigine Heaven 4.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark, a newer version of Unigine 3.0 with relatively small differences. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. The benchmark is still sometimes used, despite its significant age, as it was released back in 2013.

GTX 750 Ti 541
+15.4%

GTX 770M 469

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 HD

51
+4.1%

−4.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

2.92

3.88

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

16−18
+33.3%

12−14

−33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27 +33.3%	18−20 −33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 +50%	10−11 −50%
Battlefield 5	30−35 +52.4%	21−24 −52.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 +33.3%	14−16 −33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +33.3%	12−14 −33.3%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +43.8%	16−18 −43.8%
Far Cry New Dawn	27−30 +40%	20−22 −40%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 +39.6%	45−50 −39.6%
Hitman 3	18−20 +35.7%	14−16 −35.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	55−60 +27.9%	40−45 −27.9%
Metro Exodus	30−35 +52.4%	21−24 −52.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27−30 +40%	20−22 −40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−35 +37.5%	24−27 −37.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +16.7%	50−55 −16.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27 +33.3%	18−20 −33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 +50%	10−11 −50%
Battlefield 5	30−35 +52.4%	21−24 −52.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 +33.3%	14−16 −33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +33.3%	12−14 −33.3%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +43.8%	16−18 −43.8%
Far Cry New Dawn	27−30 +40%	20−22 −40%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 +39.6%	45−50 −39.6%
Hitman 3	18−20 +35.7%	14−16 −35.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	55−60 +27.9%	40−45 −27.9%
Metro Exodus	30−35 +52.4%	21−24 −52.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27−30 +40%	20−22 −40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−35 +37.5%	24−27 −37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 +22.7%	21−24 −22.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +16.7%	50−55 −16.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27 +33.3%	18−20 −33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16 +50%	10−11 −50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22 +33.3%	14−16 −33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +33.3%	12−14 −33.3%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +43.8%	16−18 −43.8%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 +39.6%	45−50 −39.6%
Hitman 3	18−20 +35.7%	14−16 −35.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	55−60 +27.9%	40−45 −27.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−35 +37.5%	24−27 −37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 +22.7%	21−24 −22.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +16.7%	50−55 −16.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

27−30
+40%

20−22

−40%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	20−22 +42.9%	14−16 −42.9%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16 +36.4%	10−12 −36.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 +42.9%	7−8 −42.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 +42.9%	7−8 −42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +50%	8−9 −50%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +73.1%	24−27 −73.1%
Hitman 3	12−14 +18.2%	10−12 −18.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +40%	14−16 −40%
Metro Exodus	14−16 +87.5%	8−9 −87.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 +160%	5−6 −160%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 +66.7%	6−7 −66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +39.1%	45−50 −39.1%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

16−18
+41.7%

12−14

−41.7%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Hitman 3	6−7 +100%	3−4 −100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +83.3%	24−27 −83.3%
Metro Exodus	8−9 +60%	5−6 −60%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +62.5%	8−9 −62.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Watch Dogs: Legion	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−11
+42.9%

7−8

−42.9%

This is how GTX 750 Ti and GTX 770M compete in popular games:

GTX 750 Ti is 4% faster in 1080p

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

in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 750 Ti is 250% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 750 Ti is ahead in 71 test (99%)
there's a draw in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	10.12	7.24
Recency	18 February 2014	30 May 2013
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	3 GB
Power consumption (TDP)	60 Watt	75 Watt

GTX 750 Ti has a 39.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 months, a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 25% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 750 Ti is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 770M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 750 Ti is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 770M is a notebook one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.