Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) vs GeForce GTX 750

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 750 with Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc), including specs and performance data.

GTX 750
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
8.59

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) outperforms GTX 750 by a moderate 18% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking505450
Place by popularity82not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.56no data
Power efficiency10.84no data
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Xe LPG (2023)
GPU code nameGM107Meteor Lake iGPU
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date18 February 2014 (11 years ago)14 December 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$119 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores5124
Core clock speed1020 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1085 MHz1950 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Wattno data
Maximum GPU temperature95 °Cno data
Texture fill rate34.72no data
Floating-point processing power1.111 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs32no data

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 supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length145 mmno data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed5.0 GB/sno data
Memory bandwidth80 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One mini-HDMIno data
Multi monitor support3 displaysno data
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

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 compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12_2
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.4no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.1.126-
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.

GTX 750 8.59
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) 10.14
+18%

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 3970
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) 5295
+33.4%

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 HD21−24
−19%
25
+19%

Cost per frame, $

1080p5.67no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 13
+0%
13
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 11
+0%
11
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50
+0%
50
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 16
+0%
16
+0%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 13
+0%
13
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 24
+0%
24
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 39
+0%
39
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 15
+0%
15
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30
+0%
30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Atomic Heart 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

This is how GTX 750 and Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) compete in popular games:

  • Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is 19% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 58 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.59 10.14
Recency 18 February 2014 14 December 2023
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) has a 18% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 750 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 750 is a desktop card while Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is a notebook one.

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 750
GeForce GTX 750
Intel Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)

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.


3.8 2410 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.1 10 votes

Rate Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 750 or Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.