GeForce GTX 750 Ti vs Quadro P5200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P5200 with GeForce GTX 750 Ti, including specs and performance data.

Quadro P5200
2018
16 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
27.03
+210%

P5200 outperforms GTX 750 Ti by a whopping 210% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking187454
Place by popularitynot in top-10029
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data4.31
Power efficiency21.3511.48
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameGP104GM107
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date21 February 2018 (7 years ago)18 February 2014 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$149

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 cores2560640
Core clock speed1556 MHz1020 MHz
Boost clock speed1746 MHz1085 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate279.443.40
Floating-point processing power8.94 TFLOPS1.389 TFLOPS
ROPs6416
TMUs16040

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 sizelargeno data
Bus supportno dataPCI Express 3.0
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data145 mm
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount16 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1800 MHz5.4 GB/s
Memory bandwidth230.4 GB/s86.4 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 ConnectorsNo outputsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One mini-HDMI
Multi monitor supportno data4 displays
HDMI-+
HDCP-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

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-+
Optimus+-
3D Vision Live-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.126
CUDA6.1+

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.

Quadro P5200 27.03
+210%
GTX 750 Ti 8.72

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.

Quadro P5200 12079
+210%
GTX 750 Ti 3897

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.

Quadro P5200 25100
+367%
GTX 750 Ti 5378

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.

Quadro P5200 65844
+205%
GTX 750 Ti 21608

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.

Quadro P5200 18467
+330%
GTX 750 Ti 4294

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.

Quadro P5200 106328
+239%
GTX 750 Ti 31349

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.

Quadro P5200 44354
+285%
GTX 750 Ti 11515

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

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 Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Quadro P5200 45615
+353%
GTX 750 Ti 10065

GeekBench 5 CUDA

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 CUDA API by NVIDIA.

Quadro P5200 45689
+266%
GTX 750 Ti 12499

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 HD120
+140%
50
−140%
4K48
+243%
14−16
−243%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.98
4Kno data10.64

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 80−85
+265%
21−24
−265%
Counter-Strike 2 160−170
+238%
50−55
−238%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+242%
18−20
−242%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 80−85
+265%
21−24
−265%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+162%
40−45
−162%
Counter-Strike 2 160−170
+238%
50−55
−238%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+242%
18−20
−242%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+210%
30−35
−210%
Fortnite 130−140
+139%
55−60
−139%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+180%
40−45
−180%
Forza Horizon 5 90−95
+221%
27−30
−221%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+244%
30−35
−244%
Valorant 180−190
+105%
90−95
−105%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 80−85
+265%
21−24
−265%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+162%
40−45
−162%
Counter-Strike 2 160−170
+238%
50−55
−238%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+90.2%
140−150
−90.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+242%
18−20
−242%
Dota 2 130−140
+95.6%
65−70
−95.6%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+210%
30−35
−210%
Fortnite 130−140
+139%
55−60
−139%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+180%
40−45
−180%
Forza Horizon 5 90−95
+221%
27−30
−221%
Grand Theft Auto V 100−110
+186%
35−40
−186%
Metro Exodus 65−70
+253%
18−20
−253%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+244%
30−35
−244%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 118
+372%
24−27
−372%
Valorant 180−190
+105%
90−95
−105%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+162%
40−45
−162%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+242%
18−20
−242%
Dota 2 130−140
+95.6%
65−70
−95.6%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+210%
30−35
−210%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+180%
40−45
−180%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+244%
30−35
−244%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65
+160%
24−27
−160%
Valorant 180−190
+105%
90−95
−105%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 130−140
+139%
55−60
−139%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+306%
16−18
−306%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 200−210
+182%
70−75
−182%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+300%
14−16
−300%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+310%
10−11
−310%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+280%
45−50
−280%
Valorant 220−230
+112%
100−110
−112%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+243%
21−24
−243%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+288%
8−9
−288%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+245%
20−22
−245%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+239%
21−24
−239%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+247%
14−16
−247%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 70−75
+265%
20−22
−265%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 21−24
+188%
8−9
−188%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+967%
3−4
−967%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+190%
20−22
−190%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+420%
5−6
−420%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
+360%
10−11
−360%
Valorant 170−180
+250%
50−55
−250%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+318%
10−12
−318%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+967%
3−4
−967%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Dota 2 90−95
+160%
35−40
−160%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+250%
10−11
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+225%
16−18
−225%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+278%
9−10
−278%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−35
+278%
9−10
−278%

This is how Quadro P5200 and GTX 750 Ti compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P5200 is 140% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro P5200 is 243% faster in 4K

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

  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Quadro P5200 is 967% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, Quadro P5200 surpassed GTX 750 Ti in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 27.03 8.72
Recency 21 February 2018 18 February 2014
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 60 Watt

Quadro P5200 has a 210% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

GTX 750 Ti, on the other hand, has 66.7% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P5200 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 750 Ti in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P5200 is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GTX 750 Ti is a desktop 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 Quadro P5200
Quadro P5200
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti
GeForce GTX 750 Ti

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.


4.1 101 vote

Rate Quadro P5200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 6856 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro P5200 or GeForce GTX 750 Ti, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.