GeForce GTX 750 vs Radeon R9 FURY X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 FURY X and GeForce GTX 750, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 FURY X
2015, $649
4 GB High Bandwidth Memory (HBM), 275 Watt
22.42
+184%

R9 FURY X outperforms GTX 750 by a whopping 184% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking285567
Place by popularitynot in top-10084
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.813.93
Power efficiency6.2811.06
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameFijiGM107
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date24 June 2015 (10 years ago)18 February 2014 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$649 $119

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

R9 FURY X has 48% better value for money than GTX 750.

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores4096512
Compute units64no data
Core clock speedno data1020 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHz1085 MHz
Number of transistors8,900 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)275 Watt55 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data95 °C
Texture fill rate268.834.72
Floating-point processing power8.602 TFLOPS1.111 TFLOPS
ROPs6416
TMUs25632
L1 Cache1 MB256 KB
L2 Cache2 MB2 MB

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0PCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length195 mm145 mm
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pinNone
Bridgeless CrossFire+-

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 typeHigh Bandwidth Memory (HBM)GDDR5
High bandwidth memory (HBM)+no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width4096 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1050 MHz5.0 GB/s
Memory bandwidth512 GB/s80 GB/s

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 Connectors1x HDMI 1.4a, 3x DisplayPort 1.2One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One mini-HDMI
Multi monitor supportno data3 displays
Eyefinity+-
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
HDMI++
HDCP-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
DisplayPort support+-
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAcceleration+-
CrossFire+-
FRTC+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
PowerTune+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
VCE+-
DDMA audio+no data
Blu Ray 3D-+
3D Gaming-+
3D Vision-+
3D Vision Live-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_0)
Shader Model6.55.1
OpenGL4.54.4
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan+1.1.126
Mantle+-
CUDA-+

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

R9 FURY X 22.42
+184%
GTX 750 7.90

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.

R9 FURY X 9391
+185%
Samples: 203
GTX 750 3290
Samples: 7091

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.

R9 FURY X 16710
+321%
GTX 750 3970

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 22.42 7.90
Recency 24 June 2015 18 February 2014
Power consumption (TDP) 275 Watt 55 Watt

R9 FURY X has a 184% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.

GTX 750, on the other hand, has 400% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 FURY X is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 750 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.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.2 91 votes

Rate Radeon R9 FURY X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 2823 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 FURY X or GeForce GTX 750, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.