GeForce GT 750M vs Radeon PRO WX 2100

Place in performance ranking	641	726
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	7.88	no data
Architecture	Polaris (2016−2019)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	Polaris 12	N14P-GT
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	21 March 2018 (6 years ago)	1 April 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$149	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	512	384
Core clock speed	no data	967 MHz
Boost clock speed	1219 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	2,200 million	1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	50 Watt
Texture fill rate	39.01	30.94
Floating-point performance	1.248 gflops	0.7427 gflops

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	large	medium sized
Bus support	no data	PCI Express 3.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	PCIe 3.0 x16
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	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Standard memory configuration	no data	DDR3/GDDR5
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	6000 MHz	2000 - 5000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	48 GB/s	64.19 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	1x DisplayPort, 2x mini-DisplayPort	No outputs
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 content protection	-	+
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.

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

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 API
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.5
OpenCL	2.0	1.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.1.126
CUDA	-	+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

PRO WX 2100 4.75
+37.7%

GT 750M 3.45

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

PRO WX 2100 1833
+37.6%

GT 750M 1332

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
+28.6%

−28.6%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

8−9
+33.3%

6−7

−33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 +30%	10−11 −30%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Battlefield 5	12−14 +71.4%	7−8 −71.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 +25%	8−9 −25%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Far Cry 5	10−11 +42.9%	7−8 −42.9%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 +44.4%	9−10 −44.4%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 +57.9%	18−20 −57.9%
Hitman 3	10−11 +25%	8−9 −25%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +24%	24−27 −24%
Metro Exodus	10−12 +120%	5−6 −120%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 +44.4%	9−10 −44.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 +21.4%	14−16 −21.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +9.8%	40−45 −9.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 +30%	10−11 −30%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Battlefield 5	12−14 +71.4%	7−8 −71.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 +25%	8−9 −25%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Far Cry 5	10−11 +42.9%	7−8 −42.9%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 +44.4%	9−10 −44.4%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 +57.9%	18−20 −57.9%
Hitman 3	10−11 +25%	8−9 −25%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +24%	24−27 −24%
Metro Exodus	10−12 +120%	5−6 −120%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 +44.4%	9−10 −44.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 +21.4%	14−16 −21.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −76.5%	30 +76.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +9.8%	40−45 −9.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 +30%	10−11 −30%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 +25%	8−9 −25%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Far Cry 5	10−11 +42.9%	7−8 −42.9%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 +57.9%	18−20 −57.9%
Hitman 3	10−11 +25%	8−9 −25%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +24%	24−27 −24%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 +21.4%	14−16 −21.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +240%	5 −240%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +9.8%	40−45 −9.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

12−14
+44.4%

9−10

−44.4%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Far Cry 5	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Hitman 3	9−10 +12.5%	8−9 −12.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 +37.5%	8−9 −37.5%
Metro Exodus	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 +42.9%	21−24 −42.9%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10
+28.6%

7−8

−28.6%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Hitman 3	1−2	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Metro Exodus	1−2	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6
+25%

4−5

−25%

This is how PRO WX 2100 and GT 750M compete in popular games:

PRO WX 2100 is 29% faster in 1080p

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

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the PRO WX 2100 is 800% faster.
in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GT 750M is 76% faster.

All in all, in popular games: