Radeon Pro 5300M vs GeForce GT 750M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 750M with Radeon Pro 5300M, including specs and performance data.

GT 750M
2013
4 GB DDR3, 50 Watt
3.46

Pro 5300M outperforms GT 750M by a whopping 346% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking727345
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency4.7412.43
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)
GPU code nameGK107Navi 14
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date9 January 2013 (11 years ago)13 November 2019 (5 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 cores3841280
Core clock speed941 MHz1000 MHz
Boost clock speed967 MHz1250 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million6,400 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt85 Watt
Texture fill rate30.94100.0
Floating-point processing power0.7427 TFLOPS3.2 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs3280

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 sizemedium sizedmedium sized
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Standard memory configurationDDR3/GDDR5no data
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1003 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth64.19 GB/s192.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
eDP 1.2 signal supportUp to 3840x2160no data
LVDS signal supportUp to 1920x1200no data
VGA аnalog display supportUp to 2048x1536no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportUp to 3840x2160no data
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.

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

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 API12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.12.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.131
CUDA+-

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 3.46
Pro 5300M 15.42
+346%

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.

GT 750M 1332
Pro 5300M 5940
+346%

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 HD20
−325%
85−90
+325%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−300%
24−27
+300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
−250%
35−40
+250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−1150%
24−27
+1150%
Battlefield 5 7−8
−614%
50−55
+614%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
−288%
30−35
+288%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−300%
24−27
+300%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−414%
35−40
+414%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
−367%
40−45
+367%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−426%
100−105
+426%
Hitman 3 8−9
−263%
27−30
+263%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
−212%
75−80
+212%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−960%
50−55
+960%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
−367%
40−45
+367%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
−257%
50−55
+257%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−92.7%
75−80
+92.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
−250%
35−40
+250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−1150%
24−27
+1150%
Battlefield 5 7−8
−614%
50−55
+614%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
−288%
30−35
+288%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−300%
24−27
+300%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−414%
35−40
+414%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
−367%
40−45
+367%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−426%
100−105
+426%
Hitman 3 8−9
−263%
27−30
+263%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
−212%
75−80
+212%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−960%
50−55
+960%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
−367%
40−45
+367%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
−257%
50−55
+257%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30
−23.3%
35−40
+23.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−92.7%
75−80
+92.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
−250%
35−40
+250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−1150%
24−27
+1150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
−288%
30−35
+288%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−300%
24−27
+300%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−414%
35−40
+414%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−426%
100−105
+426%
Hitman 3 8−9
−263%
27−30
+263%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
−212%
75−80
+212%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
−257%
50−55
+257%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5
−640%
35−40
+640%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−92.7%
75−80
+92.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
−367%
40−45
+367%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
−400%
30−33
+400%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−380%
24−27
+380%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−400%
14−16
+400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−467%
16−18
+467%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−8000%
80−85
+8000%
Hitman 3 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−288%
30−35
+288%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−700%
16−18
+700%
Watch Dogs: Legion 21−24
−352%
95−100
+352%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−257%
24−27
+257%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
−650%
14−16
+650%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−450%
10−12
+450%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−600%
7−8
+600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 3−4
Far Cry 5 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−2000%
21−24
+2000%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−250%
14−16
+250%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
High Preset

Hitman 3 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

This is how GT 750M and Pro 5300M compete in popular games:

  • Pro 5300M is 325% 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 5300M is 8000% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Pro 5300M is ahead in 63 tests (89%)
  • there's a draw in 8 tests (11%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.46 15.42
Recency 9 January 2013 13 November 2019
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 85 Watt

GT 750M has 70% lower power consumption.

Pro 5300M, on the other hand, has a 345.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro 5300M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 750M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 750M is a notebook graphics card while Radeon Pro 5300M is a mobile workstation one.


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
GeForce GT 750M
AMD Radeon Pro 5300M
Radeon Pro 5300M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.4 550 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 170 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 5300M 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.