GeForce GT 750M vs Radeon R9 M280X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 M280X and GeForce GT 750M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 M280X
2015
0 MB Not Listed
2.11

GT 750M outperforms R9 M280X by an impressive 64% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking864720
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data4.98
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameSaturnGK107
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date5 February 2015 (9 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 cores896384
Core clock speed1000 MHz941 MHz
Boost clock speedno data967 MHz
Number of transistors2,080 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data50 Watt
Texture fill rate61.6030.94
Floating-point processing power1.971 TFLOPS0.7427 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs5632

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 supportNot ListedPCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 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 typeNot ListedDDR3
Maximum RAM amount0 MB4 GB
Standard memory configurationno dataDDR3/GDDR5
Memory bus widthNot Listed128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1003 MHz
Memory bandwidth96 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.

FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
PowerTune+-
DualGraphics+-
ZeroCore+-
Switchable graphics+-
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.

DirectXDirectX® 1112 API
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.44.5
OpenCLNot Listed1.1
Vulkan-1.1.126
Mantle+-
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.

R9 M280X 2.11
GT 750M 3.45
+63.5%

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.

R9 M280X 813
GT 750M 1330
+63.6%

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.

R9 M280X 9222
GT 750M 9618
+4.3%

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.

R9 M280X 4698
+84.7%
GT 750M 2543

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.

R9 M280X 3498
+122%
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.

R9 M280X 23201
+114%
GT 750M 10822

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 HD27
+42.1%
19
−42.1%
4K18
−50%
27−30
+50%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Battlefield 5 13
+85.7%
7−8
−85.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−111%
18−20
+111%
Hitman 3 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−38.9%
24−27
+38.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30
+114%
14−16
−114%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−13.9%
40−45
+13.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Battlefield 5 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−111%
18−20
+111%
Hitman 3 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−38.9%
24−27
+38.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−40%
14−16
+40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 39
+30%
30
−30%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−13.9%
40−45
+13.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−111%
18−20
+111%
Hitman 3 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−38.9%
24−27
+38.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−40%
14−16
+40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9
+80%
5
−80%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−13.9%
40−45
+13.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Hitman 3 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
−75%
21−24
+75%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 2−3
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 1−2

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

This is how R9 M280X and GT 750M compete in popular games:

  • R9 M280X is 42% faster in 1080p
  • GT 750M is 50% faster in 4K

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

  • in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the R9 M280X is 114% faster.
  • in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GT 750M is 250% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R9 M280X is ahead in 4 tests (7%)
  • GT 750M is ahead in 47 tests (77%)
  • there's a draw in 10 tests (16%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.11 3.45
Recency 5 February 2015 9 January 2013

R9 M280X has an age advantage of 2 years.

GT 750M, on the other hand, has a 63.5% higher aggregate performance score.

The GeForce GT 750M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M280X 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.


AMD Radeon R9 M280X
Radeon R9 M280X
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.


2.7 3 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M280X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 538 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.