NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M vs NVIDIA GeForce 9300M G
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M and NVIDIA GeForce 9300M G videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 11 month(s) later
- Around 18% higher core clock speed: 941 MHz vs 800 MHz
- 9.7x more texture fill rate: 30.94 GTexel / s vs 3.2 GTexel / s
- 24x more pipelines: 384 vs 16
- 29x better floating-point performance: 742.7 gflops vs 25.6 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 80 nm
- 8x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 256 MB
- 6.7x more memory clock speed: 4012 MHz vs 600 MHz
- 15.6x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1330 vs 85
- Around 1% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 244 vs 242
- 4.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3334 vs 778
- 4.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3334 vs 778
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 9 January 2013 vs 1 February 2008 |
Core clock speed | 941 MHz vs 800 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 30.94 GTexel / s vs 3.2 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 384 vs 16 |
Floating-point performance | 742.7 gflops vs 25.6 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 80 nm |
Maximum memory size | 2 GB vs 256 MB |
Memory clock speed | 4012 MHz vs 600 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1330 vs 85 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 244 vs 242 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3334 vs 778 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3334 vs 778 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 9300M G
- 3.8x lower typical power consumption: 13 Watt vs 50 Watt
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 13 Watt vs 50 Watt |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 9300M G
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M | NVIDIA GeForce 9300M G |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1330 | 85 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 244 | 242 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 4258 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 15.67 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 251.09 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.144 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 10.872 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 13.423 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2351 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3520 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3334 | 778 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2351 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3520 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3334 | 778 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 461 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M | NVIDIA GeForce 9300M G | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Kepler | Tesla |
Code name | GK107 | G86 |
Launch date | 9 January 2013 | 1 February 2008 |
Place in performance rating | 1172 | 1175 |
Type | Laptop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 967 MHz | |
Core clock speed | 941 MHz | 800 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 742.7 gflops | 25.6 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 80 nm |
Pipelines | 384 | 16 |
Texture fill rate | 30.94 GTexel / s | 3.2 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 13 Watt |
Transistor count | 1,270 million | 210 million |
CUDA cores | 16 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI | ||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support | Up to 3840x2160 | |
eDP 1.2 signal support | Up to 3840x2160 | |
HDCP content protection | ||
HDMI | ||
LVDS signal support | Up to 1920x1200 | |
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming | ||
VGA аnalog display support | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 API | 10.0 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 3.3 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 256 MB |
Memory bandwidth | 64.19 GB / s | 9.6 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 4012 MHz | 600 MHz |
Memory type | DDR3, GDDR5 | GDDR2 / GDDR3 |
Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Standard memory configuration | DDR3 / GDDR5 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision | ||
3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
Blu-Ray 3D Support | ||
CUDA | ||
Direct Compute | ||
FXAA | ||
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
Optimus | ||
Gigathread technology | ||
HDCP-capable | ||
HDR (High Dynamic-Range Lighting) | ||
PCI-E 16x | ||
PowerMizer 7.0 |