So sánh gtx 750 và gtx 660 năm 2024

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores960512CUDA cores960512Core clock speed980 MHz1020 MHzBoost clock speed1033 MHz1085 MHzNumber of transistors2,540 million1,870 millionManufacturing process technology28 nm28 nmPower consumption (TDP)140 Watt55 WattMaximum GPU temperatureno data95 °CTexture fill rate78.4 billion/sec34.72Floating-point performance1,981 gflops1,111 gflops

Size and 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 supportPCI Express 3.0PCI Express 3.0InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16Length9.5" (24.1 cm)5.7" (14.5 cm)Height4.376" (11.1 cm)4.376" (11.1 cm)Width2-slot2-slotSupplementary power connectorsOne 6-pinNoneSLI options+no data

Memory

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated VRAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5GDDR5Maximum RAM amount2 GB4 GBMemory bus width192-bit GDDR5128 BitMemory clock speed6.0 GB/s5.0 GB/sMemory bandwidth144.2 GB/s80 GB/s

Video outputs and ports

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 ConnectorsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPortOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One mini-HDMIMulti monitor support4 displays3 displaysHDMI++HDCP++Maximum VGA resolution2048x15362048x1536Audio input for HDMIInternalInternal

Technologies

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

3D Blu-Ray+no dataBlu Ray 3Dno data+3D Gaming++3D Vision++3D Vision Liveno data+

API support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)Shader Model5.15.1OpenGL4.34.4OpenCL1.21.2Vulkan1.1.1261.1.126CUDA++

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

660 outperforms 750 by 19% in our combined benchmark results.

Passmark

This is probably the most ubiquitous benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

660 outperforms 750 by 19% in Passmark.

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 seemingly made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

660 outperforms 750 by 27% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

660 outperforms 750 by 19% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 5%

660 outperforms 750 by 18% in GeekBench 5 Vulkan.

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses CUDA API by NVIDIA.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

750 outperforms 660 by 22% in GeekBench 5 CUDA.

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

660 outperforms 750 by 18% in Octane Render OctaneBench.

Mining hashrates

Cryptocurrency mining performance of GeForce GTX 660 and GeForce GTX 750. Usually measured in megahashes per second.

Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) 66 Mh/s 143 Mh/s

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 HD47 35−40

Advantages and disadvantages

Performance score 10.29 8.66 Recency 6 September 2012 18 February 2014 Cost $229 $119 Memory bus width 192 128 Pipelines / CUDA cores 960 512 Memory bandwidth 144.2 80 Power consumption (TDP) 140 Watt 55 Watt

The GeForce GTX 660 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 750 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Cast your own vote

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.

GeForce GTX 660

GeForce GTX 750

Similar GPU comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

User ratings: view and submit

Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 on a scale of 1 to 5:

Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 on a scale of 1 to 5:

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.