GeForce GT 750M Mac Edition vs GT 750M SLI

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 750M SLI and GeForce GT 750M Mac Edition, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GT 750M SLI
2013
2x 2 GB DDR3, GDDR5
6.94
+59.5%

GT 750M SLI outperforms GT 750M Mac Edition by an impressive 60% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking558676
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data5.99
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameN14P-GTGK107
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 April 2013 (11 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 cores768384
Core clock speed967 MHz926 MHz
Number of transistors1300 Million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data50 Watt
Texture fill rateno data29.63
Floating-point processing powerno data0.7112 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data32

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
Interfaceno dataPCIe 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 typeDDR3, GDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2x 2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width2x 128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 - 5000 MHz1254 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data80.26 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 dataNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX1112 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
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. 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.

GT 750M SLI 6.94
+59.5%
GT 750M Mac Edition 4.35

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.

GT 750M SLI 16142
+60.6%
GT 750M Mac Edition 10049

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.

GT 750M SLI 3703
+102%
GT 750M Mac Edition 1837

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 HD53
+76.7%
30−35
−76.7%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+66.7%
9−10
−66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Elden Ring 18−20
+90%
10−11
−90%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+83.3%
12−14
−83.3%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+66.7%
9−10
−66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+75%
16−18
−75%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+80%
10−11
−80%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+66.7%
12−14
−66.7%
Valorant 21−24
+83.3%
12−14
−83.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+83.3%
12−14
−83.3%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+66.7%
9−10
−66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Dota 2 24−27
+71.4%
14−16
−71.4%
Elden Ring 18−20
+90%
10−11
−90%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+72.2%
18−20
−72.2%
Fortnite 40−45
+70.8%
24−27
−70.8%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+75%
16−18
−75%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+71.4%
14−16
−71.4%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+80%
10−11
−80%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+60%
35−40
−60%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+66.7%
12−14
−66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+75%
12−14
−75%
Valorant 21−24
+83.3%
12−14
−83.3%
World of Tanks 163
+63%
100−105
−63%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+83.3%
12−14
−83.3%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+66.7%
9−10
−66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Dota 2 24−27
+71.4%
14−16
−71.4%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+72.2%
18−20
−72.2%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+75%
16−18
−75%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+60%
35−40
−60%
Valorant 21−24
+83.3%
12−14
−83.3%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Elden Ring 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Grand Theft Auto V 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+62.5%
24−27
−62.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
World of Tanks 50−55
+66.7%
30−33
−66.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Valorant 18−20
+80%
10−11
−80%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 18−20
+80%
10−11
−80%
Elden Ring 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
+66.7%
12−14
−66.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Dota 2 18−20
+80%
10−11
−80%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Fortnite 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Valorant 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%

This is how GT 750M SLI and GT 750M Mac Edition compete in popular games:

  • GT 750M SLI is 77% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.94 4.35
Recency 1 April 2013 8 November 2013

GT 750M SLI has a 59.5% higher aggregate performance score.

GT 750M Mac Edition, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 7 months.

The GeForce GT 750M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 750M Mac Edition in performance tests.


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

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 GeForce GT 750M SLI
GeForce GT 750M SLI
NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M Mac Edition
GeForce GT 750M Mac Edition

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 16 votes

Rate GeForce GT 750M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 25 votes

Rate GeForce GT 750M Mac Edition on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.