Radeon RX 5300M vs HD 7750

Place in the ranking	672	392
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	1.26	no data
Power efficiency	5.49	10.42
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)	RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)
GPU code name	Cape Verde	Navi 14
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Design	reference	no data
Release date	15 February 2012 (12 years ago)	13 November 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$109	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores	512	1408
Core clock speed	no data	1000 MHz
Boost clock speed	800 MHz	1445 MHz
Number of transistors	1,500 million	6,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	85 Watt
Texture fill rate	25.60	127.2
Floating-point processing power	0.8192 TFLOPS	4.069 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	32
TMUs	32	88

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 size	no data	medium sized
Bus support	PCIe 2.1 x16	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x8
Length	168 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

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 type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	3 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	96 Bit
Memory clock speed	1125 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	72 GB/s	168.0 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 Connectors	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort	No outputs
Eyefinity	+	-
HDMI	+	-
DisplayPort support	+	-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire	+	-
FreeSync	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	DirectX® 11	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	-	1.2.131

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.

HD 7750 4.39

RX 5300M 12.87
+193%

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.

HD 7750 1688

RX 5300M 4947
+193%

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.

HD 7750 2240

RX 5300M 10306
+360%

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 HD

18−21

−239%

61
+239%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

6.06

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Elden Ring	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	66 +0%	66 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Metro Exodus	69 +0%	69 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	71 +0%	71 +0%
Valorant	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Dota 2	76 +0%	76 +0%
Elden Ring	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Far Cry 5	35 +0%	35 +0%
Fortnite	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	64 +0%	64 +0%
Metro Exodus	46 +0%	46 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16 +0%	16 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Valorant	43 +0%	43 +0%
World of Tanks	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	49 +0%	49 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Dota 2	95 +0%	95 +0%
Far Cry 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Valorant	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Elden Ring	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
World of Tanks	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Far Cry 5	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Metro Exodus	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Valorant	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Dota 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Elden Ring	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Metro Exodus	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Dota 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Far Cry 5	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Fortnite	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Valorant	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%

This is how HD 7750 and RX 5300M compete in popular games:

RX 5300M is 239% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	4.39	12.87
Recency	15 February 2012	13 November 2019
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	3 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	85 Watt

HD 7750 has 13.3% lower power consumption.

RX 5300M, on the other hand, has a 193.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 5300M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7750 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 7750 is a desktop card while Radeon RX 5300M is a notebook one.

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