Radeon RX 6750 XT vs GeForce GTX 295

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 295 and Radeon RX 6750 XT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 295
2009
1792 MB GDDR3, 289 Watt
3.13

RX 6750 XT outperforms GTX 295 by a whopping 1624% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking75347
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.1251.75
Power efficiency0.7515.05
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGT200BNavi 22
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date8 January 2009 (15 years ago)3 March 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$500 $549

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 6750 XT has 43025% better value for money than GTX 295.

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 cores4802560
CUDA cores per GPU240no data
Core clock speed576 MHz2150 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2600 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million17,200 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)289 Watt250 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate46.08416.0
Floating-point processing power0.5962 TFLOPS13.31 TFLOPS
ROPs2864
TMUs80160
Ray Tracing Coresno data40

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length267 mm267 mm
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount1792 MB12 GB
Standard memory config per GPU896 MBno data
Memory bus width896 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed999 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth223.8 GB/s432.0 GB/s
Memory interface width per GPU448 Bitno data

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 ConnectorsTwo Dual Link DVIHDMI1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

Supported technologies

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

High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR)128bitno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.5
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.12.1
VulkanN/A1.3
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.

GTX 295 3.13
RX 6750 XT 53.97
+1624%

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.

GTX 295 1206
RX 6750 XT 20818
+1626%

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 HD9−10
−1733%
165
+1733%
1440p5−6
−1660%
88
+1660%
4K2−3
−2450%
51
+2450%

Cost per frame, $

1080p55.563.33
1440p100.006.24
4K250.0010.76

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 165
+0%
165
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Battlefield 5 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 127
+0%
127
+0%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Hitman 3 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Metro Exodus 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Battlefield 5 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 109
+0%
109
+0%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Hitman 3 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Metro Exodus 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 304
+0%
304
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 98
+0%
98
+0%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Hitman 3 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 210
+0%
210
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 260
+0%
260
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 135
+0%
135
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 98
+0%
98
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 60
+0%
60
+0%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%
Hitman 3 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 158
+0%
158
+0%
Metro Exodus 126
+0%
126
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 186
+0%
186
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Hitman 3 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Metro Exodus 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 79
+0%
79
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 26
+0%
26
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 99
+0%
99
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 41
+0%
41
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

This is how GTX 295 and RX 6750 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6750 XT is 1733% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6750 XT is 1660% faster in 1440p
  • RX 6750 XT is 2450% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.13 53.97
Recency 8 January 2009 3 March 2022
Maximum RAM amount 1792 MB 12 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 289 Watt 250 Watt

RX 6750 XT has a 1624.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 585.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 685.7% more advanced lithography process, and 15.6% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6750 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 295 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 GTX 295
GeForce GTX 295
AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT
Radeon RX 6750 XT

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.


3.9 80 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 295 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 2518 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6750 XT 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.