GeForce GT 750M Mac Edition vs Radeon HD 8650G + HD 8670M Dual Graphics
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 8650G + HD 8670M Dual Graphics and GeForce GT 750M Mac Edition, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
GT 750M Mac Edition outperforms HD 8650G + HD 8670M Dual Graphics by an impressive 66% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 867 | 720 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 6.09 |
| Architecture | no data | Kepler (2012−2018) |
| GPU code name | no data | GK107 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 1 August 2013 (12 years ago) | 8 November 2013 (11 years ago) |
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 | 768 | 384 |
| Core clock speed | 720 / 775 MHz | 926 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 1,270 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 50 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 29.63 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.7112 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 16 |
| TMUs | no data | 32 |
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 | medium sized | no data |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
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 | DDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1800 - 2000 MHz | 1254 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 80.26 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | no data | No outputs |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11 | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | - | 3.0 |
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.
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.
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.
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:
| 900p | 29
−55.2%
| 45−50
+55.2%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−50%
|
9−10
+50%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
| God of War | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
−50%
|
12−14
+50%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−50%
|
9−10
+50%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
| Fortnite | 12−14
−50%
|
18−20
+50%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
−61.5%
|
21−24
+61.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
| God of War | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−50%
|
18−20
+50%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−54.8%
|
65−70
+54.8%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
−50%
|
12−14
+50%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−50%
|
9−10
+50%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 45−50
−56.3%
|
75−80
+56.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
| Dota 2 | 24−27
−60%
|
40−45
+60%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
| Fortnite | 12−14
−50%
|
18−20
+50%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
−61.5%
|
21−24
+61.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
| God of War | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 6−7
−50%
|
9−10
+50%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−50%
|
18−20
+50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10
−55.6%
|
14−16
+55.6%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−54.8%
|
65−70
+54.8%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
−50%
|
12−14
+50%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
| Dota 2 | 24−27
−60%
|
40−45
+60%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
−61.5%
|
21−24
+61.5%
|
| God of War | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−50%
|
18−20
+50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10
−55.6%
|
14−16
+55.6%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−54.8%
|
65−70
+54.8%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 12−14
−50%
|
18−20
+50%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 18−20
−50%
|
27−30
+50%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24
−52.2%
|
35−40
+52.2%
|
| Valorant | 21−24
−42.9%
|
30−33
+42.9%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−50%
|
9−10
+50%
|
| God of War | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
−50%
|
24−27
+50%
|
| Valorant | 12−14
−50%
|
18−20
+50%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Dota 2 | 6−7
−50%
|
9−10
+50%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| God of War | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
This is how HD 8650G + HD 8670M Dual Graphics and GT 750M Mac Edition compete in popular games:
- GT 750M Mac Edition is 55% faster in 900p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.40 | 3.99 |
| Recency | 1 August 2013 | 8 November 2013 |
GT 750M Mac Edition has a 66.3% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 3 months.
The GeForce GT 750M Mac Edition is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8650G + HD 8670M Dual Graphics in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
