OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£35VRAM:2 GBMemory bus width:128 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):50 W

NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 3 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

6.0/10

Overall score

Score
6.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 89% of models
Score components

40%

3.4

Technical score

25%

8.1

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.8, the mark of a weaker model in this category

â–¼Worse than 89% of graphics cards
7.2

Value for money

Value for money
7.2/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
Score components

70%

6.0

Overall score

30%

10

Price

â–¼Worse than 68%
3.4

Technical score

Technical score
3.4/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Score components

44%

1.5

Performance

24%

1.2

Memory

12%

8.9

Power

11%

6.3

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

6.1

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 99%
8.1

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.1/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 60% of models

80%

8.2

Average grade

20%

7.4

Popularity

Grades by review (3)
1 review, its grade estimated from the review text. 2 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–²Better than 60%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £35
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M

Technical score
Technical score
3.4/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Score components:

44%

1.5

Performance

24%

1.2

Memory

12%

8.9

Power

11%

6.3

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

6.1

Connectivity

3.4
Reviews score
8.1
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.2/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 68% of models
Score components:

70%

6.0

Overall score

30%

10

Price

7.2
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
604 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 604 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 99.2% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 0 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 83.1% of graphics cards and equal to 16.9% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
1,333 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 1,333 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 98.5% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
635 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 635 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 98.3% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
0.74 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 0.74 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 97.9% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
2 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 2 GB of VRAM, which is less than 94.3% of graphics cards and equal to 3.9% of graphics cards.
Memory type
DDR3
This graphics card uses DDR3 memory, which is older than on 99% of graphics cards and equal to 0.7% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
128 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 128 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 68.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 26.7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
64.19 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 64.19 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 97.5% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
4,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 4,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 97.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.4% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
3
This graphics card supports PCIe 3, which is older than on 77.6% of graphics cards and equal to 20.1% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 24.1% of graphics cards and equal to 75.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12
This graphics card supports DirectX 12, which is older than on 81.8% of graphics cards and equal to 17% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.2
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.2, which is older than on 94.9% of graphics cards and equal to 3.9% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
3
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 3 displays, which is fewer than 91% of graphics cards and equal to 6.6% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
3840x2160
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 3840x2160, which is lower than that of 97% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.9% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
?
DisplayPort version
1.2
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.2, which is older than on 93.9% of graphics cards and equal to 5.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
5.4 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 5.4 Gbps, which is slower than on 87.9% of graphics cards and equal to 6% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
50 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 50 W, which is lower than that of 96.1% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1.1% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
50 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 50 W under peak load, which is lower than 97.1% of graphics cards and equal to 0.9% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
300 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 300 W PSU, which is lower than that of 94% of graphics cards and equal to that of 5% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
50 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 50 W, which is lower than that of 97% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.8% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
50 W
Show more
Size
?
Length
?
Height
?
Slot width
?
Weight
?
Show more

NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 76.7% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (50 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    50 W vs 215 W
  • 53.8% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (300 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    300 W vs 650 W
  • 77.3% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (50 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    50 W vs 220 W
  • 12.5% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.1/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 60% of models

    80%

    8.2

    Average grade

    20%

    7.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (3)
    1 review, its grade estimated from the review text. 2 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.1 vs 7.2
  • 14.86x cheaper
    NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M is cheaper than the average graphics card (£35 vs £520).
    £35 vs £520
  • 2 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    2 vs 0
  • Supports NVLink
    This graphics card supports NVLink, the average graphics card does not.
  • Supports multi-GPU linking
    This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.
  • 12.5% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.1/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 60% of models

    80%

    8.2

    Average grade

    20%

    7.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (3)
    1 review, its grade estimated from the review text. 2 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.1 vs 7.2
  • 14.86x cheaper
    NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M is cheaper than the average graphics card (£35 vs £520).
    £35 vs £520
  • More FP64 throughput
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:24 vs 1:64).
    1:24 vs 1:64
  • 2 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    2 vs 0
  • Supports multi-GPU linking
    This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.
  • Supports NVLink
    This graphics card supports NVLink, the average graphics card does not.
  • 59.9% smaller GPU die
    This graphics card has a lower GPU die size than the average graphics card (118 mm² vs 294 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 294 mm².
    118 mm² vs 294 mm²
  • 76.7% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (50 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    50 W vs 215 W
  • 53.8% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (300 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    300 W vs 650 W
  • 77.3% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (50 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    50 W vs 220 W
  • 77.3% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (50 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    50 W vs 220 W
  • 61.4% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (967 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    967 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 10 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (2 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    2 GB vs 12 GB
  • 38 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (2 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    2 vs 40
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 5.6x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    28 nm vs 5 nm
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 51% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (941 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    941 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 152 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (32 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    32 vs 184
  • 2.8% worse value for money
    NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M has worse value for money than the average graphics card (7.21 vs 7.4).
    7.21 vs 7.41
  • 61.4% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (967 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    967 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 38 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (2 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    2 vs 40
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 51% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (941 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    941 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 152 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (32 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    32 vs 184
  • 91.8% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (30.9 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    30.94 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 95.2% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (7.7 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    7.74 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 48 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (16 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    16 vs 64
  • 144 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    0 vs 144
  • 96.7% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (0.7 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    0.74 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 10 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2013 vs 2023).
    January 2013
    2013 vs 2023
  • 94.1% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (1,333 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    1,333 points vs 22,638 points
  • 95.9% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (604 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    604 points vs 14,779 points
  • 94.7% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (635 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    635 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 97.5% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (0.7 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    0.74 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 93.8% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.03 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 3,968 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (384 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    384 vs 4,352
  • 10 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (2 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    2 GB vs 12 GB
  • 85.7% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (64.2 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    64.19 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 78.9% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (4,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    4,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 64 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    128 bit vs 192 bit
  • 42.7% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,003 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,003 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 87.5% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (16 KB vs 128 KB). The average graphics card has 128 KB L1 cache.
    16 KB vs 128 KB
  • Older GDDR version
    This graphics card uses an older GDDR version than the average graphics card (DDR3 vs GDDR6).
    DDR3 vs GDDR6
  • 5.6x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    28 nm vs 5 nm
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No ray tracing
    This graphics card does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (3 vs 4).
    3 vs 4
  • No AI upscalers
    This graphics card does not support AI upscalers, the average graphics card does.
  • No XeSS support
    This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No mesh shaders
    This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, the average graphics card does.
  • Older Vulkan version
    This graphics card supports an older Vulkan version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4).
    1.2 vs 1.4
  • No DirectStorage support
    This graphics card does not support DirectStorage, the average graphics card does.
  • No Resizable BAR
    This graphics card does not support Resizable BAR, while the average graphics card does. 76.4% of Graphics cards support it.
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12 vs 12 Ultimate
  • Older OpenCL version
    This graphics card supports an older OpenCL version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 3).
    1.2 vs 3
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.5 vs 6.8).
    6.5 vs 6.8
  • No sampler feedback
    This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
  • 94.5% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (1,270 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    1,270 million vs 22,900 million
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (1.4a vs 2.1a).
    1.4a vs 2.1a
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • 1 fewer displays supported
    This graphics card supports fewer displays than the average graphics card (3 vs 4). The average graphics card supports 4 displays.
    3 vs 4
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No DSC support
    This graphics card does not support DSC, the average graphics card does.
  • No VRR support
    This graphics card does not support VRR, the average graphics card does.
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Older DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4a).
    1.2 vs 1.4a
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (1.4 vs 2.3).
    1.4 vs 2.3
  • Lower display resolution
    This graphics card supports a lower maximum digital resolution than the average graphics card (3840x2160 vs 7680x4320). The average graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320.
    3840x2160 vs 7680x4320
  • Older NVDEC generation
    This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (1 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
    1 vs 6
  • No HDMI output
    This graphics card does not include HDMI output, the average graphics card does.
  • Not VR ready
    This graphics card is not VR ready, while the average graphics card is.
  • 75% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (5.4 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 21.6 Gbps.
    5.4 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
  • 24 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (91 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    91 °C vs 67 °C
  • 8 °C lower thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a lower thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (103 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    103 °C vs 95 °C
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

8.0
ZONEofTECH
≈ estimated
24/11/2013
Hands-on test · Crisis 3 performance at several settings and resolutions
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M is playable in Crisis 3 with optimised settings, but Very High at high resolution drops far below playable frame rates.
8.0
Brue Computing
≈ estimated
17/04/2015
Hands-on benchmark · GTA V frame rates at two settings
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M runs GTA V smoothly and stays playable at reduced detail, but higher detail drops to 20-30 fps.
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded
Hands-on video, no verdict
Not graded
Not graded
Overview video
Not graded
Overview video
Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

9.5
reviewed.com
≈ estimated
17/06/2014
Laptop review · Creative workstation
Verdict
The Apple MacBook Pro with GeForce GT 750M is a powerful laptop with a sharp screen for creators, but battery life is only about three hours.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M

  • Capable of handling casual e-sports and older AAA titles like GTA V and Skyrim on low to medium settings
  • Supports multi-display technology for more immersive setups
  • Relatively low power consumption (50W TDP) compared to desktop counterparts
  • Offers a significant performance boost over integrated graphics of its era, like the HD Graphics 4000
  • Included feature support for DirectX 12 (at feature level 11_0) and OpenCL 3.0
  • Can be used in SLI configurations in certain laptop models to significantly improve performance in supported games

What customers don't like about NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M

  • Severely outdated for modern AAA gaming, often struggling to reach 30 FPS even on lowest settings
  • Limited VRAM (typically 1GB or 2GB) causes stuttering and performance drops in modern textures
  • Susceptible to thermal throttling in slim laptop chassis, requiring undervolting or cooling pads for stability
  • Known issues with random FPS drops in some DX9 titles, possibly due to driver or hardware design flaws
  • Lacks support for modern features like Ray Tracing and DLSS upscaling
  • DirectX 12 support is limited to feature level 11_0, causing compatibility issues with newer DX12-only titles

Verdict

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M is a mobile graphics card launched in 2013 based on the 28nm Kepler architecture and the GK107 chip. It features 384 CUDA cores, a base clock of 941 MHz (boostable to 967 MHz), and is typically paired with up to 4 GB of DDR3 or GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit interface. Key strengths include its low 50W power draw and support for technologies like SLI, Optimus, and PhysX, making it efficient for mid-range multimedia laptops and light gaming at the time of its release. However, it lacks support for modern DirectX 12 feature levels, does not feature ray tracing or DLSS, and struggles significantly with modern AAA titles or high-resolution external displays.

Compare NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found