Radeon RX 6750 GRE vs Pro Vega 56

Place in the ranking	178	88
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	45.11	41.35
Power efficiency	10.52	11.84
Architecture	GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	Vega 10	Navi 22
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	14 August 2017 (7 years ago)	17 October 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$399	$549

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

Pro Vega 56 has 9% better value for money than RX 6750 GRE.

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	3584	2560
Core clock speed	1138 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1250 MHz	2581 MHz
Number of transistors	12,500 million	17,200 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	210 Watt	250 Watt
Texture fill rate	280.0	413.0
Floating-point processing power	8.96 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	64	64
TMUs	224	160

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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

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	HBM2	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	12 GB
Memory bus width	2048 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	786 MHz	18 GB/s
Memory bandwidth	402.4 GB/s	432.0 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 HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI	+	+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	2.1
Vulkan	1.1.125	1.3

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.

Pro Vega 56 29.97

RX 6750 GRE 40.15
+34%

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.

Pro Vega 56 12353

RX 6750 GRE 16546
+33.9%

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	100 −30%	130−140 +30%
4K	61 −31.1%	80−85 +31.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	3.99 +5.8%	4.22 −5.8%
4K	6.54 +4.9%	6.86 −4.9%

Pro Vega 56 has 6% lower cost per frame in 1080p
Pro Vega 56 and RX 6750 GRE have nearly equal cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	60−65 −27%	80−85 +27%
Cyberpunk 2077	65−70 −26.9%	85−90 +26.9%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	90−95 −30.4%	120−130 +30.4%
Counter-Strike 2	60−65 −27%	80−85 +27%
Cyberpunk 2077	65−70 −26.9%	85−90 +26.9%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 −27.5%	190−200 +27.5%
Forza Horizon 5	80−85 −31%	110−120 +31%
Metro Exodus	80−85 −23.5%	100−105 +23.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 −28.8%	85−90 +28.8%
Valorant	120−130 −32.8%	170−180 +32.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	90−95 −30.4%	120−130 +30.4%
Counter-Strike 2	60−65 −27%	80−85 +27%
Cyberpunk 2077	65−70 −26.9%	85−90 +26.9%
Dota 2	36 −25%	45−50 +25%
Far Cry 5	85−90 −25%	110−120 +25%
Fortnite	150−160 −33.3%	200−210 +33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 −27.5%	190−200 +27.5%
Forza Horizon 5	80−85 −31%	110−120 +31%
Grand Theft Auto V	100−110 −33.3%	140−150 +33.3%
Metro Exodus	80−85 −23.5%	100−105 +23.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	180−190 −31.1%	240−250 +31.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 −28.8%	85−90 +28.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	100−110 −28.4%	140−150 +28.4%
Valorant	120−130 −32.8%	170−180 +32.8%
World of Tanks	270−280 −26.8%	350−400 +26.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	90−95 −30.4%	120−130 +30.4%
Counter-Strike 2	60−65 −27%	80−85 +27%
Cyberpunk 2077	65−70 −26.9%	85−90 +26.9%
Dota 2	102 −27.5%	130−140 +27.5%
Far Cry 5	85−90 −25%	110−120 +25%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 −27.5%	190−200 +27.5%
Forza Horizon 5	80−85 −31%	110−120 +31%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	180−190 −31.1%	240−250 +31.1%
Valorant	120−130 −32.8%	170−180 +32.8%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	55−60 −31.6%	75−80 +31.6%
Grand Theft Auto V	55−60 −31.6%	75−80 +31.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 −31.4%	230−240 +31.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 −29%	40−45 +29%
World of Tanks	200−210 −30.4%	270−280 +30.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	60−65 −29%	80−85 +29%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−33 −33.3%	40−45 +33.3%
Far Cry 5	100−110 −28.7%	130−140 +28.7%
Forza Horizon 4	85−90 −23.6%	110−120 +23.6%
Forza Horizon 5	50−55 −25%	65−70 +25%
Metro Exodus	70−75 −31.9%	95−100 +31.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50−55 −25%	65−70 +25%
Valorant	90−95 −29%	120−130 +29%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	14−16 −20%	18−20 +20%
Dota 2	55−60 −27.1%	75−80 +27.1%
Grand Theft Auto V	55−60 −27.1%	75−80 +27.1%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −15.4%	30−33 +15.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−110 −28.7%	130−140 +28.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	20−22 −20%	24−27 +20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	55−60 −27.1%	75−80 +27.1%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 −25%	45−50 +25%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 −20%	18−20 +20%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −33.3%	16−18 +33.3%
Dota 2	96 −25%	120−130 +25%
Far Cry 5	45−50 −33.3%	60−65 +33.3%
Fortnite	40−45 −27.9%	55−60 +27.9%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −27.5%	65−70 +27.5%
Forza Horizon 5	27−30 −20.7%	35−40 +20.7%
Valorant	45−50 −27.7%	60−65 +27.7%

This is how Pro Vega 56 and RX 6750 GRE compete in popular games:

RX 6750 GRE is 30% faster in 1080p
RX 6750 GRE is 31% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	29.97	40.15
Recency	14 August 2017	17 October 2023
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	12 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	210 Watt	250 Watt

Pro Vega 56 has 19% lower power consumption.

RX 6750 GRE, on the other hand, has a 34% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6750 GRE is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro Vega 56 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro Vega 56 is a mobile workstation card while Radeon RX 6750 GRE is a desktop one.

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