Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870 vs GeForce GTX 750

Place in the ranking	504	382
Place by popularity	84	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	4.50	no data
Power efficiency	10.90	14.68
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2017)	Vega (2017−2020)
GPU code name	GM107	Vega Kaby Lake-G
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	18 February 2014 (10 years ago)	7 January 2018 (7 years 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 cores	512	1280
Core clock speed	1020 MHz	931 MHz
Boost clock speed	1085 MHz	1011 MHz
Number of transistors	1,870 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	65 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	95 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	34.72	no data
Floating-point processing power	1.111 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	16	no data
TMUs	32	no 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).

Laptop size	no data	medium sized
Bus support	PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	no data
Length	145 mm	no data
Height	4.376" (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	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 type	GDDR5	HBM2
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	5.0 GB/s	no data
Memory bandwidth	80 GB/s	no 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 Connectors	One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One mini-HDMI	no data
Multi monitor support	3 displays	no data
HDMI	+	-
HDCP	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	Internal	no 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.

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12_1
Shader Model	5.1	no data
OpenGL	4.4	no data
OpenCL	1.2	no data
Vulkan	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 8.49

RX Vega M GL / 870 13.52
+59.2%

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

RX Vega M GL / 870 7329
+84.6%

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	27−30 −63%	44 +63%
1440p	16−18 −68.8%	27 +68.8%
4K	9−10 −66.7%	15 +66.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	4.41	no data
1440p	7.44	no data
4K	13.22	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Metro Exodus	44 +0%	44 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	48 +0%	48 +0%
Valorant	47 +0%	47 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Dota 2	27 +0%	27 +0%
Far Cry 5	37 +0%	37 +0%
Fortnite	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	41 +0%	41 +0%
Metro Exodus	30 +0%	30 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	129 +0%	129 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16 +0%	16 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Valorant	30 +0%	30 +0%
World of Tanks	180−190 +0%	180−190 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Dota 2	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Far Cry 5	51 +0%	51 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Valorant	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	62 +0%	62 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
World of Tanks	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Far Cry 5	32 +0%	32 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Metro Exodus	27 +0%	27 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Valorant	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Dota 2	29 +0%	29 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	29 +0%	29 +0%
Metro Exodus	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30 +0%	30 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	29 +0%	29 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Dota 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Far Cry 5	15 +0%	15 +0%
Fortnite	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Valorant	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

This is how GTX 750 and RX Vega M GL / 870 compete in popular games:

RX Vega M GL / 870 is 63% faster in 1080p
RX Vega M GL / 870 is 69% faster in 1440p
RX Vega M GL / 870 is 67% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	8.49	13.52
Recency	18 February 2014	7 January 2018
Chip lithography	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	65 Watt

GTX 750 has 18.2% lower power consumption.

RX Vega M GL / 870, on the other hand, has a 59.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870 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 Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870 is a notebook one.

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