NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M 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 1 year(s) 7 month(s) later
- Around 21% higher core clock speed: 941 MHz vs 775 MHz
- Around 25% higher texture fill rate: 30.94 GTexel / s vs 24.8 billion / sec
- 2x more pipelines: 384 vs 192
- Around 25% better floating-point performance: 742.7 gflops vs 595.2 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
- Around 50% lower typical power consumption: 50 Watt vs 75 Watt
- Around 33% higher maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1536 MB
- 3.2x more memory clock speed: 4012 MHz vs 1250 MHz
- Around 4% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1330 vs 1274
- Around 15% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 15.67 vs 13.598
- Around 27% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2351 vs 1857
- Around 7% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3520 vs 3275
- Around 27% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2351 vs 1857
- Around 7% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3520 vs 3275
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 9 January 2013 vs 30 May 2011 |
| Core clock speed | 941 MHz vs 775 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 30.94 GTexel / s vs 24.8 billion / sec |
| Pipelines | 384 vs 192 |
| Floating-point performance | 742.7 gflops vs 595.2 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 40 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt vs 75 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 2 GB vs 1536 MB |
| Memory clock speed | 4012 MHz vs 1250 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1330 vs 1274 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 15.67 vs 13.598 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2351 vs 1857 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3520 vs 3275 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2351 vs 1857 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3520 vs 3275 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M
- Around 9% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 266 vs 244
- Around 12% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 4769 vs 4267
- Around 61% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 404.618 vs 251.09
- Around 7% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.227 vs 1.144
- 2.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 25.333 vs 10.872
- 3.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 44.123 vs 13.423
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 266 vs 244 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 4769 vs 4267 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 404.618 vs 251.09 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.227 vs 1.144 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 25.333 vs 10.872 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 44.123 vs 13.423 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3341 vs 3334 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3341 vs 3334 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M
| 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) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1330 | 1274 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 244 | 266 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 4267 | 4769 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 15.67 | 13.598 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 251.09 | 404.618 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.144 | 1.227 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 10.872 | 25.333 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 13.423 | 44.123 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2351 | 1857 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3520 | 3275 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3334 | 3341 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2351 | 1857 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3520 | 3275 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3334 | 3341 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 461 | 0 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Kepler | Fermi 2.0 |
| Code name | GK107 | GF116 |
| Launch date | 9 January 2013 | 30 May 2011 |
| Place in performance rating | 1141 | 1144 |
| Type | Laptop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 967 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 941 MHz | 775 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 742.7 gflops | 595.2 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | 192 |
| Texture fill rate | 30.94 GTexel / s | 24.8 billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Transistor count | 1,270 million | 1,170 million |
| CUDA cores | 192 | |
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 | PCI-E 2.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Laptop size | medium sized | large |
| SLI options | 2-way | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 API | 12 API |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 1536 MB |
| Memory bandwidth | 64.19 GB / s | |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 4012 MHz | 1250 MHz |
| Memory type | DDR3, GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| 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 | ||
| 3D Blu-Ray | ||
| 3D Gaming | ||
| DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
