GeForce GT 750M vs Quadro P5200

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P5200 with GeForce GT 750M, including specs and performance data.

Quadro P5200
2018
16 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
31.49
+810%

P5200 outperforms GT 750M by a whopping 810% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking176727
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency21.594.74
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGP104GK107
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date21 February 2018 (6 years ago)9 January 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 cores2560384
Core clock speed1556 MHz941 MHz
Boost clock speed1746 MHz967 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate279.430.94
Floating-point processing power8.94 TFLOPS0.7427 TFLOPS
ROPs6416
TMUs16032

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 sizelargemedium sized
Bus supportno dataPCI Express 3.0
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount16 GB4 GB
Standard memory configurationno dataDDR3/GDDR5
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1800 MHz1003 MHz
Memory bandwidth230.4 GB/s64.19 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 supportno dataUp to 3840x2160
LVDS signal supportno dataUp to 1920x1200
VGA аnalog display supportno dataUp to 2048x1536
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportno dataUp to 3840x2160
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 (12_1)12 API
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.126
CUDA6.1+

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.

Quadro P5200 31.49
+810%
GT 750M 3.46

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.

Quadro P5200 12135
+811%
GT 750M 1332

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Quadro P5200 25100
+887%
GT 750M 2543

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.

Quadro P5200 65844
+585%
GT 750M 9618

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.

Quadro P5200 18467
+1073%
GT 750M 1574

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Quadro P5200 106328
+883%
GT 750M 10822

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Quadro P5200 44199
+937%
GT 750M 4262

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Quadro P5200 45615
+1077%
GT 750M 3874

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses CUDA API by NVIDIA.

Quadro P5200 45689
+1365%
GT 750M 3118

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 HD112
+460%
20
−460%
4K38
+850%
4−5
−850%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+800%
6−7
−800%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65−70
+590%
10−11
−590%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60
+2650%
2−3
−2650%
Battlefield 5 100−110
+1386%
7−8
−1386%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 65−70
+713%
8−9
−713%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+800%
6−7
−800%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+914%
7−8
−914%
Far Cry New Dawn 80−85
+800%
9−10
−800%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
+800%
18−20
−800%
Hitman 3 65−70
+738%
8−9
−738%
Horizon Zero Dawn 130−140
+456%
24−27
−456%
Metro Exodus 100−110
+2040%
5−6
−2040%
Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
+778%
9−10
−778%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 152
+986%
14−16
−986%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+185%
40−45
−185%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65−70
+590%
10−11
−590%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60
+2650%
2−3
−2650%
Battlefield 5 100−110
+1386%
7−8
−1386%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 65−70
+713%
8−9
−713%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+800%
6−7
−800%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+914%
7−8
−914%
Far Cry New Dawn 80−85
+800%
9−10
−800%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
+800%
18−20
−800%
Hitman 3 65−70
+738%
8−9
−738%
Horizon Zero Dawn 130−140
+456%
24−27
−456%
Metro Exodus 100−110
+2040%
5−6
−2040%
Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
+778%
9−10
−778%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110−120
+700%
14−16
−700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+123%
30
−123%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+185%
40−45
−185%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65−70
+590%
10−11
−590%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60
+2650%
2−3
−2650%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 65−70
+713%
8−9
−713%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+800%
6−7
−800%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+914%
7−8
−914%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
+800%
18−20
−800%
Hitman 3 65−70
+738%
8−9
−738%
Horizon Zero Dawn 130−140
+456%
24−27
−456%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110−120
+700%
14−16
−700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65
+1200%
5
−1200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+185%
40−45
−185%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
+778%
9−10
−778%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+900%
6−7
−900%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+880%
5−6
−880%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+1033%
3−4
−1033%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+1000%
3−4
−1000%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+1133%
3−4
−1133%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+1050%
2−3
−1050%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+825%
4−5
−825%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+18200%
1−2
−18200%
Hitman 3 40−45
+400%
8−9
−400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+738%
8−9
−738%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+917%
6−7
−917%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 70−75
+825%
8−9
−825%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+2050%
2−3
−2050%
Watch Dogs: Legion 160−170
+700%
21−24
−700%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+671%
7−8
−671%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+1450%
2−3
−1450%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+1200%
2−3
−1200%
Hitman 3 24−27
+1200%
2−3
−1200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 150−160
+881%
16−18
−881%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+875%
4−5
−875%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
+820%
5−6
−820%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+900%
2−3
−900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10 0−1
Far Cry 5 18−20
+800%
2−3
−800%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+4300%
1−2
−4300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+950%
4−5
−950%
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+600%
4−5
−600%

This is how Quadro P5200 and GT 750M compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P5200 is 460% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro P5200 is 850% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro P5200 is 18200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, Quadro P5200 surpassed GT 750M in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 31.49 3.46
Recency 21 February 2018 9 January 2013
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 50 Watt

Quadro P5200 has a 810.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

GT 750M, on the other hand, has 100% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P5200 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 750M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P5200 is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GT 750M 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 Quadro P5200
Quadro P5200
NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M
GeForce GT 750M

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.


4.1 94 votes

Rate Quadro P5200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 550 votes

Rate GeForce GT 750M 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.