Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Test Setup And Benchmarks

GeForce GTX 750 Ti Review: Maxwell Adds Performance Using Less Power
By , Don Woligroski, And Igor Wallossek

We tested all of the cards in today's story with each company's latest beta drivers: Catalyst 14.1 beta 6 from AMD and 334.67 beta from Nvidia, however the new GeForce GTX 750 Ti required a special 334.69 beta driver. We used medium- to high-detail settings at 1920x1080 to give the GeForce GTX 750 Ti and its competition a realistic workload, which should strike a good balance between image quality and performance for this class of card.


Test System
CPU
Intel Core i5-2550K (Sandy Bridge), Overclocked to 4.2 GHz @ 1.3 V
Motherboard
Asus P8Z77-V LX.
LGA 1155, Chipset: Intel Z77M
Networking
On-Board Gigabit LAN controller
Memory
Corsair Performance Memory, 4 x 4 GB, 1866 MT/s, CL 9-9-9-24-1T
Graphics
Sapphire Radeon R7 260X
1100 MHz GPU, 2 GB GDDR5 at 1625 MHz (6500 MT/s)

XFX Radeon HD 7850
860 MHz GPU, 1 GB GDDR5 at 1200 MHz (4800 MT/s)

Sapphire Radeon R7 265
925 MHz GPU, 2 GB GDDR5 at 1400 MHz (5600 MT/s)

Reference Radeon R9 270
925 MHz GPU, 2 GB GDDR5 at 1400 MHz (5600 MT/s)

Reference GeForce GTX 650 Ti
925 MHz GPU, 1 GB DDR3 at 1350 MHz (5400 MT/s)

Reference GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost
980/1033 MHz GPU, 2 GB GDDR5 at 1502 MHz (6008 MT/s)

Reference GeForce GTX 660
980/1033 MHz GPU, 2 GB GDDR5 at 1502 MHz (6008 MT/s)

Reference GeForce GTX 750 Ti
1020/1085 MHz GPU, 2 GB GDDR5 at 1350 MHz (5400 MT/s)
Hard Drive
Samsung 840 Pro, 256 GB SSD, SATA 6Gb/s
Power
XFX PRO850W, ATX12V, EPS12V
Software and Drivers
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 8 Pro x64
DirectX
DirectX 11
Graphics Drivers
AMD Catalyst 14.1 Beta 6, Nvidia GeForce 334.67 Beta
Nvidia GeForce 334.69 Beta for GeForce GTX 750 Ti

We've almost completely eliminated mechanical storage in the lab, and instead lean on solid-state drives to alleviate I/O-related bottlenecks. Samsung sent all of our offices 256 GB 840 Pros, so we standardize on these exceptional SSDs.

Naturally, discrete graphics cards require a substantial amount of stable power, so XFX sent along its PRO850W 80 PLUS Bronze-certified power supply. This modular PSU employs a single +12 V rail rated for 70 A. XFX claims that this unit provides 850 W of continuous power (not peak) at 50 degrees Celsius (a higher temperature than you'll find inside most enclosures).

Benchmark Configuration
3D Games
Metro: Last Light
Version 1.0.0.14, Built-in Benchmark
Grid 2
Version 1.8.85.8679, Built-in Benchmark Scene D6
Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag
Version 1.05, Custom THG Benchmark, 40-Sec
Battlefield 4
Version 1.0.0.1, Custom THG Benchmark, 90-Sec
BioShock Infinite
Version 1.1.24.21018, Built-in Benchmark
Far Cry 3
Version 1.05, Custom THG Benchmark, 55-Sec
Arma 3
Version 1.10.114.700, Custom THG Benchmark, 30-Sec
Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the Reviews comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

Display all 232 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 17 Hide
    Sangeet Khatri , February 18, 2014 6:21 AM
    Well.. there is not a lot of performance in it, but I love it for a reason that it is a 60W card. I mean for 60W Nvidia has seriously nailed it. The only competition is way behind, the 7750 performs a lot less for similar wattage.Let's see how AMD replies to this because after the launch of 750Ti, the 7750 is no longer the best card for upgrading for people who have a 350W PSU.I don't generally say this, but Nvidia well done! Take a bow.
  • 12 Hide
    meluvcookies , February 18, 2014 6:08 AM
    on performance, I'll take the extra frames of the 265, but damn, for 60w, I'm totally impressed by this card. both the 750Ti and the R7 265 would be decent upgrades from my aging GTX460.
  • 11 Hide
    cangelini , February 18, 2014 6:18 AM
    Quote:
    Quote:
    But without the big cooler, GTX 750 Ti is daintier than a lot of sound cards we've tested.
    I'm pretty sure you meant to type "video cards" on page one there. Cheers.
    Actually meant sound card :)  It's definitely smaller than a small video card, but I even have sound cards here that are larger.
Other Comments
  • 12 Hide
    meluvcookies , February 18, 2014 6:08 AM
    on performance, I'll take the extra frames of the 265, but damn, for 60w, I'm totally impressed by this card. both the 750Ti and the R7 265 would be decent upgrades from my aging GTX460.
  • -5 Hide
    s3anister , February 18, 2014 6:11 AM
    Quote:
    But without the big cooler, GTX 750 Ti is daintier than a lot of sound cards we've tested.


    I'm pretty sure you meant to type "video cards" on page one there. Cheers.
  • 0 Hide
    Bloob , February 18, 2014 6:17 AM
    Ah, I just love some healthy competition.
  • 0 Hide
    Bloob , February 18, 2014 6:18 AM
    Also
    Quote:
    It’s difficult to make this story all about frame rates when we’re comparing a 60 W GPU to a 150 W processor
    Is a bit confusing.
  • 11 Hide
    cangelini , February 18, 2014 6:18 AM
    Quote:
    Quote:
    But without the big cooler, GTX 750 Ti is daintier than a lot of sound cards we've tested.
    I'm pretty sure you meant to type "video cards" on page one there. Cheers.
    Actually meant sound card :)  It's definitely smaller than a small video card, but I even have sound cards here that are larger.
  • 17 Hide
    Sangeet Khatri , February 18, 2014 6:21 AM
    Well.. there is not a lot of performance in it, but I love it for a reason that it is a 60W card. I mean for 60W Nvidia has seriously nailed it. The only competition is way behind, the 7750 performs a lot less for similar wattage.Let's see how AMD replies to this because after the launch of 750Ti, the 7750 is no longer the best card for upgrading for people who have a 350W PSU.I don't generally say this, but Nvidia well done! Take a bow.
  • 0 Hide
    houldendub , February 18, 2014 6:30 AM
    Nice little card, awesome! I feel like this would be an absolutely awesome test bed for a dual chip version, great performance with minimal power usage.
  • 0 Hide
    Randy David , February 18, 2014 6:32 AM
    Anybody else notice the lesser shaders and TMUs on the Zotac card in GPU-Z?
  • 4 Hide
    thdarkshadow , February 18, 2014 6:34 AM
    The whole time I was reading the review I was like it isn't beating the 650ti boost... :(  but then I remembered it uses less than half the power lol. I am impressed nvidia. While I make purchases more on performance than power consumption I can still appreciate what nvidia is doing
  • 0 Hide
    houldendub , February 18, 2014 6:42 AM
    Quote:
    Anybody else notice the lesser shaders and TMUs on the Zotac card in GPU-Z?


    Don't take this as fact, but the drivers look newer for the Zotac card than the others, possibly just a bug with the older drivers? The cards are advertised as having 640 shaders anyway.

    Also weird, the GPU-Z screenshot is taken with Windows 8, whereas the Gigabyte and MSI cards are on Windows 7. The mystery continues...
  • 1 Hide
    jeraldtapz , February 18, 2014 6:45 AM
    As an AMD Fan, I'm impressed. Currently thinking in buying one.
  • 1 Hide
    logainofhades , February 18, 2014 6:49 AM
    I wonder how well these little guys fold? With such crazy low power consumption, these might just work for my file server. It can fold at night and game well enough, since that system doesn't play anything other than WoW most of the time. Wouldn't mind them as an upgrade for my HD 5850's and 4870's in my extra rigs. Less heat and power but still plenty capable is a win win. The first Nv card I have seriously considered in quite some time. :D 
  • 1 Hide
    09mlb86 , February 18, 2014 6:52 AM
    Why does GPU-Z report 960 Stream Processors for MSI and Gigabyte?
  • 6 Hide
    DryCreamer , February 18, 2014 6:55 AM
    who would have thought? 1080p gaming with a 300 watt power supply? I can't wait to see what laptops will do with Maxwell... shame they will only sell with 768p screens :/ Dry
  • 0 Hide
    Gman450 , February 18, 2014 6:57 AM
    I'm impressed. Nvidia doesn't usually pull it off with most of their mid range cards, but this is just amazing performance for that wattage. Well done!
  • 0 Hide
    GAMER4000 , February 18, 2014 6:59 AM
    How can this be practically as fast as a R7 265 when it is 25% faster in BF4??
  • 3 Hide
    GAMER4000 , February 18, 2014 7:04 AM
    Also,the reviewer goes on about the R7 265 being a 150W GPU and the GTX750TI being a 60W one??However,it seems he has not read his own article:http://media.bestofmicro.com/3/3/422607/original/06-Power-Consumption-Gaming.pngThe R9 270X and HD7870 are consuming under 130W,and the R7 265 is likely to consume less power if the HD7850 is anything to go by.Yes,the GTX750TI has decent performance for a bus powered card,but the reviewer seems to be overstating the power consumption of the R7 265 and understating its performance at the same time. Why??
  • 8 Hide
    keyrock , February 18, 2014 7:07 AM
    That's thoroughly impressive performance for just 60W. This makes me quite excited to both see what Maxwell will bring to the laptop market, where power consumption is a much bigger issue than on desktops, and what a 200W Maxwell card will bring to the high-end gaming market.
  • 0 Hide
    farky84 , February 18, 2014 7:07 AM
    Maybe I have missed something but why don't we see the GTX 760 in the comparison?
  • 0 Hide
    cangelini , February 18, 2014 7:07 AM
    Quote:
    Quote:
    Anybody else notice the lesser shaders and TMUs on the Zotac card in GPU-Z?
    Don't take this as fact, but the drivers look newer for the Zotac card than the others, possibly just a bug with the older drivers? The cards are advertised as having 640 shaders anyway.Also weird, the GPU-Z screenshot is taken with Windows 8, whereas the Gigabyte and MSI cards are on Windows 7. The mystery continues...
    Igor took his screenshots using an older driver. They're now updated with the correct driver installed!
Display more comments