So sánh gtx 960 vs 750ti 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. Show
Pipelines / CUDA cores1024640CUDA cores1024640Core clock speed1127 MHz1020 MHzBoost clock speed1178 MHz1085 MHzNumber of transistors2,940 million1,870 millionManufacturing process technology28 nm28 nmPower consumption (TDP)120 Watt60 WattTexture fill rate72 billion/sec43.40Floating-point performance2,413 gflops1,389 gflops Size and compatibilityInformation 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-slotRecommended system power (PSU)400 Wattno dataSupplementary power connectors1x 6-pinsNoneSLI options+no data MemoryParameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM. Memory typeGDDR5GDDR5Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GBMemory bus width128 Bit128 BitMemory clock speed7.0 GB/s5.4 GB/sMemory bandwidth112 GB/s86.4 GB/sShared memory-- Video outputs and portsTypes 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 ConnectorsDual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One mini-HDMIMulti monitor support4 displays4 displaysHDMI++HDCP++Maximum VGA resolution2048x15362048x1536G-SYNC support+no dataAudio input for HDMIInternalInternal TechnologiesSupported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes. Blu Ray 3Dno data+3D Gamingno data+3D Visionno data+GameStream+no dataGeForce ShadowPlay+no dataGPU Boost2.0no dataGameWorks+no data3D Vision Liveno data+ API supportList of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions. DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_0)Shader Model6.45.1OpenGL4.44.6OpenCL1.21.2Vulkan+1.1.126CUDA++ Synthetic benchmark performanceNon-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale. Combined synthetic benchmark scoreThis 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. 960 outperforms 750 Ti by 55% in our combined benchmark results. PassmarkThis is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of 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% 960 outperforms 750 Ti by 55% in Passmark. 3DMark Vantage Performance3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead. Benchmark coverage: 17% 960 outperforms 750 Ti by 42% in 3DMark Vantage Performance. 3DMark 11 Performance GPU3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy. Benchmark coverage: 17% 960 outperforms 750 Ti by 100% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU. 3DMark Fire Strike GraphicsFire 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% 960 outperforms 750 Ti by 84% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics. 3DMark Cloud Gate GPUCloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid. Benchmark coverage: 14% 960 outperforms 750 Ti by 59% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU. GeekBench 5 OpenCLGeekbench 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% 960 outperforms 750 Ti by 59% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL. GeekBench 5 VulkanGeekbench 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% 960 outperforms 750 Ti by 107% in GeekBench 5 Vulkan. GeekBench 5 CUDAGeekbench 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% 960 outperforms 750 Ti by 42% in GeekBench 5 CUDA. Octane Render OctaneBenchThis 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% 960 outperforms 750 Ti by 37% in Octane Render OctaneBench. Unigine Heaven 4.0This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark, a newer version of Unigine 3.0 with relatively small differences. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. The benchmark is still sometimes used, despite its significant age, as it was released back in 2013. Benchmark coverage: 1% 960 outperforms 750 Ti by 60% in Unigine Heaven 4.0. Mining hashratesCryptocurrency mining performance of GeForce GTX 960 and GeForce GTX 750 Ti. Usually measured in megahashes per second. Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) 318 Mh/s 183 Mh/s Decred / DCR (Decred) 0.92 Gh/s 0.51 Gh/s Ethereum / ETH (DaggerHashimoto) 8 Mh/s 2.3 Mh/s Monero / XMR (CryptoNight) 0.27 kh/s 0.25 kh/s Zcash / ZEC (Equihash) 141.47 Sol/s 74.4 Sol/s Gaming performanceLet's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS. Average FPS across all PC gamesHere are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions: Full HD65 50 4K29 18−20 Performance in popular gamesFull HD Low Preset Cyberpunk 207724−27 16−18 Full HD Medium Preset Assassin's Creed Odyssey30−35 +52.4% 21−24 −52.4% Assassin's Creed Valhalla27−30 +80% 14−16 −80% Battlefield 550−55 +55.9% 30−35 −55.9% Call of Duty: Modern Warfare40−45 +48.1% 27−30 −48.1% Cyberpunk 207724−27 +50% 16−18 −50% Far Cry 540−45 +64% 24−27 −64% Far Cry New Dawn40−45 +59.3% 27−30 −59.3% Forza Horizon 450−55 +51.4% 35−40 −51.4% Hitman 340−45 +69.2% 24−27 −69.2% Horizon Zero Dawn30−35 +65% 20−22 −65% Red Dead Redemption 224−27 +52.9% 16−18 −52.9% Shadow of the Tomb Raider30−35 +57.1% 21−24 −57.1% Watch Dogs: Legion27−30 +61.1% 18−20 −61.1% Full HD High Preset Assassin's Creed Odyssey30−35 +52.4% 21−24 −52.4% Assassin's Creed Valhalla27−30 +80% 14−16 −80% Battlefield 550−55 +55.9% 30−35 −55.9% Call of Duty: Modern Warfare40−45 +48.1% 27−30 −48.1% Cyberpunk 207724−27 +50% 16−18 −50% Far Cry 540−45 +64% 24−27 −64% Far Cry New Dawn40−45 +59.3% 27−30 −59.3% Forza Horizon 450−55 +51.4% 35−40 −51.4% Hitman 340−45 +69.2% 24−27 −69.2% Horizon Zero Dawn30−35 +65% 20−22 −65% Metro Exodus24−27 +60% 14−16 −60% Red Dead Redemption 224−27 +52.9% 16−18 −52.9% Shadow of the Tomb Raider30−35 +57.1% 21−24 −57.1% The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt50 +138% 21−24 −138% Watch Dogs: Legion27−30 +61.1% 18−20 −61.1% Full HD Ultra Preset Assassin's Creed Odyssey30−35 +52.4% 21−24 −52.4% Assassin's Creed Valhalla27−30 +80% 14−16 −80% Battlefield 550−55 +55.9% 30−35 −55.9% Cyberpunk 207724−27 +50% 16−18 −50% Far Cry 540−45 +64% 24−27 −64% Far Cry New Dawn40−45 +59.3% 27−30 −59.3% Forza Horizon 450−55 +51.4% 35−40 −51.4% The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt28 +33.3% 21−24 −33.3% Watch Dogs: Legion27−30 +61.1% 18−20 −61.1% 1440p High Preset Call of Duty: Modern Warfare21−24 +53.3% 14−16 −53.3% Hitman 324−27 +56.3% 16−18 −56.3% Horizon Zero Dawn21−24 +40% 14−16 −40% Metro Exodus14−16 +75% 8−9 −75% Red Dead Redemption 210−12 +57.1% 7−8 −57.1% Shadow of the Tomb Raider20−22 +53.8% 12−14 −53.8% 1440p Ultra Preset Assassin's Creed Odyssey16−18 +77.8% 9−10 −77.8% Assassin's Creed Valhalla12−14 +160% 5−6 −160% Battlefield 530−35 +94.1% 16−18 −94.1% Cyberpunk 20778−9 +60% 5−6 −60% Far Cry 524−27 +62.5% 16−18 −62.5% Far Cry New Dawn27−30 +81.3% 16−18 −81.3% Forza Horizon 427−30 +70.6% 16−18 −70.6% The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt18−20 +90% 10−11 −90% Watch Dogs: Legion10−11 +100% 5−6 −100% 4K High Preset Call of Duty: Modern Warfare10−12 +57.1% 7−8 −57.1% Hitman 314−16 +55.6% 9−10 −55.6% Horizon Zero Dawn10−12 +22.2% 9−10 −22.2% Metro Exodus8−9 +167% 3−4 −167% Red Dead Redemption 28−9 +60% 5−6 −60% Shadow of the Tomb Raider10−11 +100% 5−6 −100% The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt14−16 +114% 7−8 −114% 4K Ultra Preset Assassin's Creed Odyssey9−10 +80% 5−6 −80% Assassin's Creed Valhalla7−8 +75% 4−5 −75% Battlefield 516−18 +113% 8−9 −113% Cyberpunk 20773−4 +200% 1−2 −200% Far Cry 512−14 +50% 8−9 −50% Far Cry New Dawn14−16 +36.4% 10−12 −36.4% Forza Horizon 420−22 +66.7% 12−14 −66.7% Watch Dogs: Legion6−7 +100% 3−4 −100% This is how GTX 960 and GTX 750 Ti compete in popular games: 1080p resolution:
4K resolution:
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
All in all, in popular games:
Advantages and disadvantagesPerformance score 15.63 10.06 Recency 22 January 2015 18 February 2014 Cost $199 $149 Pipelines / CUDA cores 1024 640 Memory bandwidth 112 86.4 Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 60 Watt The GeForce GTX 960 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 750 Ti 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 voteDo you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card. GeForce GTX 960 GeForce GTX 750 Ti Similar GPU comparisonsWe selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider. User ratings: view and submitHere you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself. Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 on a scale of 1 to 5: Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti on a scale of 1 to 5: Questions and commentsHere you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch. |
