GeForce GTX 750 vs Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) with GeForce GTX 750, including specs and performance data.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
2020
15 Watt
8.98
+3.5%

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) outperforms GTX 750 by a minimal 3% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking484494
Place by popularity3477
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data4.59
Power efficiency41.0610.82
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameVegaGM107
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date7 January 2020 (4 years ago)18 February 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$119

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 cores512512
Core clock speedno data1020 MHz
Boost clock speed2100 MHz1085 MHz
Number of transistorsno data1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt55 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data95 °C
Texture fill rateno data34.72
Floating-point processing powerno data1.111 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data32

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).

Bus supportno dataPCI Express 3.0
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data145 mm
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
Widthno data1-slot
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 typeno dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data5.0 GB/s
Memory bandwidthno data80 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 dataOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One mini-HDMI
Multi monitor supportno data3 displays
HDMI-+
HDCP-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

Supported technologies

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

Blu Ray 3D-+
3D Gaming-+
3D Vision-+
3D Vision Live-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_112 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.4
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.1.126
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.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 8.98
+3.5%
GTX 750 8.68

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.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 3743
GTX 750 3970
+6.1%

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 HD22
+4.8%
21−24
−4.8%
1440p16
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
4K9
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data5.67
1440pno data8.50
4Kno data14.88

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 19
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+4.8%
21−24
−4.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20
+11.1%
18−20
−11.1%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+3.7%
27−30
−3.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 14
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+16.7%
18−20
−16.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+8.3%
24−27
−8.3%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+10.9%
55−60
−10.9%
Hitman 3 15
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+13.3%
45−50
−13.3%
Metro Exodus 35
+16.7%
30−33
−16.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 33
+10%
30−33
−10%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 36
+20%
30−33
−20%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+9.1%
55−60
−9.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+4.8%
21−24
−4.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+3.7%
27−30
−3.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+16.7%
18−20
−16.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+8.3%
24−27
−8.3%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+10.9%
55−60
−10.9%
Hitman 3 15
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+13.3%
45−50
−13.3%
Metro Exodus 25
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27
+12.5%
24−27
−12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+9.1%
55−60
−9.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+4.8%
21−24
−4.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+16.7%
18−20
−16.7%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+10.9%
55−60
−10.9%
Hitman 3 14
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24
+14.3%
21−24
−14.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 23
+9.5%
21−24
−9.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12
+20%
10−11
−20%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21
+16.7%
18−20
−16.7%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+12.5%
16−18
−12.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 11
+10%
10−11
−10%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 5
+25%
4−5
−25%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+11.4%
35−40
−11.4%
Hitman 3 10
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20
+11.1%
18−20
−11.1%
Metro Exodus 17
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 59
+7.3%
55−60
−7.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 13
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Hitman 3 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+5.7%
35−40
−5.7%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%

This is how RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) and GTX 750 compete in popular games:

  • RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 5% faster in 1080p
  • RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 14% faster in 1440p
  • RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 13% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.98 8.68
Recency 7 January 2020 18 February 2014
Chip lithography 7 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 55 Watt

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) has a 3.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 266.7% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) and GeForce GTX 750.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is a notebook card while GeForce GTX 750 is a desktop 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.


AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750
GeForce GTX 750

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.


3.8 1199 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 2324 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 750 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.