Today we will take a look at the second budget product based on the new Maxwell architecture and the GM107 graphics chip. GeForce GTX 750 from GeForce GTX 750 Ti has fewer computing units. Of the five SMMs, the younger version has four active, so the GTX 750 already has 512 stream processors and 32 texture units. The graphics chip frequencies of both GeForces are the same - with a base value of 1020 MHz, the Boost Clock is stated to be 1085 MHz. But, as we remember, the maximum frequency in Boost is even higher. The memory is slightly slower - the effective data exchange rate for GDDR5 is 5010 MHz instead of 5400 MHz for the GeForce GTX 750 Ti.
A TDP of 55 W is declared, which is even less characteristics old GeForce GTX 650. The standard video buffer size for the GeForce GTX 750 is one gigabyte. But variations with a larger volume made by some manufacturers are also possible.
We will look at a video card made by ASUS, which is equipped with a standard amount of memory, but is pre-overclocked at the factory.
The card comes in a compact box. External design is standard for ASUS products. The package contents are minimal; inside the box there is only a disk with software.
At first glance, it is clear that this is a representative of the budget class - small in size, with a simple cooling system in design.
The plastic cooler shroud covers most of the board, but the radiator underneath is not that large.
When examining the reverse side, it is worth noting the presence of a sticker on one of the screws. This prevents the cooling system from being safely removed without voiding the warranty.
The rear panel has HDMI, DVI, D-Sub connectors. This universal set will allow you to connect any monitors, so the kit does not include any additional adapters.
The radiator is reminiscent of boxed cooling Intel processors- dense core and diverging curved petals. In fact, this design is also used in the reference GeForce GTX 750.
We do not have the opportunity to directly compare the sizes of the reference radiator and the ASUS radiator. But we can clearly state the advantage of the video card in question thanks to the larger FirstD FD8015U12S fan of 80 mm size.
A simple printed circuit board inherits the design of the ASUS GTX750TI-OC-2GD5, only instead of three GPU power phases, two are implemented.
Full marking of the GM107-300-A2 processor.
Four SKhynix H5GC2H24BFR T2C memory chips are soldered.
Only the graphics core was factory overclocked - the base frequency was increased to 1059 MHz with a Boost Clock of 1137 MHz. The memory operates at the prescribed 5010 MHz (according to monitoring - 5012 MHz).
ASIC Quality is 82.6%.
Real Boost reaches 1215 MHz and the frequency constantly remains at this mark. Based on the results of a 12-minute warm-up in the Unigine Valley benchmark, the GPU temperature did not exceed 58 °C. The fan spun up to only 1700 rpm, creating minimal noise. Good results for such a cooling system.
ASUS managed to overclock to 1194 MHz at the base frequency with a maximum Boost of 1349 MHz. It is noteworthy that the younger card has a function to increase the power limit, and this ultimately ensures complete stability at maximum frequency without drawdowns even in the heaviest games. The memory was overclocked to 6010 MHz.
For overclocking tests, the fan was set to a higher speed mode (1950 rpm) to ensure minimal temperature change. In this mode, the video card completed almost all tests. The crash and black screen occurred at the very end of testing. But when the card cooled down, we were able to complete the remaining tests without any problems. This demonstrates that the card was working at its limit. Presumably, the reason is the high memory frequencies, and for everyday use one would have to use lower GDDR5 values.
A few words about how the video card was tested as a reference version. The GeForce GTX 750 Ti's Boost frequency easily reaches 1163 MHz with minimal drops. For our tests we used fixed value at 1150 MHz as a potential Boost in such operating conditions. They did the same this time, lowering the base frequency to such a level that the real value stopped at 1150 MHz. Although, with a lower TDP and lower operating temperatures, the GeForce GTX 750 is more likely to maintain Boost at maximum. So we may have even stripped our card of its legitimate 10-15 MHz. If there are discrepancies, they are tiny and do not fundamentally affect the final results. Characteristics of tested video cards
All participants testing the GeForce GTX 750 Ti will participate in comparative testing. Their characteristics are given in the table below. Older models were tested only at nominal speed, without overclocking.
Below are the official frequency data. The graphs show the full range of NVIDIA core operating frequencies, including peak Boost values.
| Video adapter | GeForce GTX 660 | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost | GeForce GTX 750 | GeForce GTX 650 Ti | Radeon R9 270 | Radeon HD 7850 | Radeon R7 260X 2GB | Radeon R7 260X 1GB | Radeon R7 260 | |
| Core | GK106 | GM107 | GK106 | GM107 | GM107 | GK106 | Curacao | Pitcairn | Bonaire | Bonaire | Bonaire |
| Number of transistors, million pieces | 2540 | 1870 | 2540 | 1870 | 1870 | 2540 | 2800 | 2800 | 2080 | 2080 | 2080 |
| Technical process, nm | 28 | 28 | 28 | 28 | 28 | 28 | 28 | 28 | 28 | 28 | 28 |
| Core area, sq. mm | 221 | 148 | 221 | 148 | 148 | 221 | 212 | 212 | 160 | 160 | 160 |
| Number of stream processors | 960 | 640 | 768 | 512 | 512 | 768 | 1280 | 1024 | 896 | 896 | 768 |
| Number of texture blocks | 80 | 40 | 64 | 32 | 32 | 64 | 80 | 64 | 56 | 56 | 48 |
| Number of rendering units | 24 | 16 | 24 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 32 | 32 | 16 | 16 | 16 |
| Core frequency, MHz | 980-1033 | 1020-1085 | 980-1033 | 1059-1137 | 1020-1085 | 928 | 625 | 860 | 1100 | 1000 | 1000 |
| Memory bus, bit | 192 | 128 | 192 | 128 | 128 | 128 | 256 | 256 | 128 | 128 | 128 |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory frequency, MHz | 6008 | 5400 | 6008 | 5010 | 5010 | 5400 | 5600 | 4800 | 6500 | 6000 | 6000 |
| Memory capacity, MB | 2048 | 2048 | 2048 | 1024 | 1024 | 1024 | 2048 | 2048 | 1024 | 1024 | 1024 |
| Supported DirectX Version | 11.1 | 11.2 | 11.1 | 11.2 | 11.2 | 11.1 | 11.2 | 11.1 | 11.2 | 11.2 | 11.2 |
| Interface | PCI-E 3.0 | PCI-E 3.0 | PCI-E 3.0 | PCI-E 3.0 | PCI-E 3.0 | PCI-E 3.0 | PCI-E 3.0 | PCI-E 3.0 | PCI-E 3.0 | PCI-E 3.0 | PCI-E 3.0 |
| Declared power level, W | 140 | 60 | 134 | 55 | 55 | 110 | 150 | 130 | 115 | up to 115 | 95 |
Test stand
The test bench configuration is as follows:
- CPU: Intel Core i7-3930K ([email protected] GHz, 12 MB);
- cooler: Thermalright Venomous X;
- motherboard: ASUS Rampage IV Formula/Battlefield 3 (Intel X79 Express);
- memory: Kingston KHX2133C11D3K4/16GX (4x4 GB, DDR3-2133@1866 MHz, 10-11-10-28-1T);
- system disk: Intel SSD 520 Series 240GB (240 GB, SATA 6Gb/s);
- additional drive: Hitachi HDS721010CLA332 (1 TB, SATA 3Gb/s, 7200 rpm);
- power supply: Seasonic SS-750KM (750 W);
- monitor: ASUS PB278Q (2560x1440, 27″);
- operating system: Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 x64;
- GeForce GTX 750 driver: NVIDIA GeForce 334.69;
- GeForce driver: NVIDIA GeForce 334.67;
- Radeon driver: ATI Catalyst 14.1 beta1.6.
Test results
Let's start studying the results with Black Flag. Here we see a negligible difference between the GeForce GTX 750 and GeForce GTX 650 Ti at nominal and overclocked. The first is 4% weaker than the Radeon R7 260. The advantage of ASUS over the reference is 5-6%.
The GeForce GTX 750 in Batman turns out to be slightly weaker than the old GeForce GTX 650 Ti. ASUS outperforms its predecessor in terms of average frame rate and is slightly ahead of the younger version of the Radeon R7 260X. Overclocking GeForce allows you to achieve up to 20% advantage over a video adapter with recommended frequencies.
The new GeForce GTX 750 wins by 3-5% relative to the younger NVIDIA participant and is less than 4% short of the average fps level of the Radeon R7 260X. The lag behind the GeForce GTX 750 Ti is 19%, which can almost be completely compensated by overclocking the younger newcomer.
The amount of video memory has a significant impact on performance in . Therefore, the gap between the GeForce GTX 750 and GeForce GTX 750 Ti reaches 27-30%. The newcomer's advantage over the GeForce GTX 650 Ti ranges from 10% in average fps to 21% in minimum fps. The GeForce GTX 750 and Radeon R7 260X have the same minimum score, with a slight advantage over their rival AMD in terms of the average gaming parameter. Overclocking allows ASUS to reach the performance level of the Radeon R7 260X with two gigabytes of memory.
The newcomer turns out to be faster than all versions of the Radeon R7 260X. ASUS is as close as possible to the Radeon HD 7850 in terms of average frame rate. It is noteworthy that GeForce overclocking The GTX 750 has almost no effect on the minimum fps, although with the GeForce GTX 750 Ti everything is different - the increase is excessive, even higher than the increase in frequencies. It seems that the new video driver will eliminate this funny incident.
The budget newcomer is losing ground relative to the GeForce GTX 650 Ti in the game. Even ASUS falls a little short of the level of its predecessor. The difference between the GeForce GTX 750 and GeForce GTX 750 Ti is only 16%. AMD representatives demonstrate an overall advantage. The video adapter in question manages to overtake the younger version of the Radeon R7 260X when overclocked to 1194-1349/6010 MHz.
The GeForce GTX 750 has an average position between the GeForce GTX 650 Ti and Radeon R7 260X 1GB. The gap from competitor AMD is 4-11%. The lag from its older brother GeForce GTX 750 Ti is from 15% in average fps to 22% in minimum fps. Acceleration allows you to catch up with your older partner. At frequencies of 1194-1349/6010 MHz, the newcomer is inferior to the Radeon HD 7850 by only 3-4%.
GeForce GTX 750 beats GeForce GTX 650 Ti in . With the younger Radeon R7 260X, parity in average frequency with a minimum indicator is 10% weaker. ASUS is faster than the reference by another 4-5%. Overclocking adds 11-14% performance. It is not possible to catch up with the GeForce GTX 750 Ti.
A modest advantage of the regular version of the GeForce GTX 750 over the GeForce GTX 650 Ti and an equally modest gap between ASUS and the Radeon R7 260X 1GB. The difference between GeForce GTX 750 and GeForce GTX 750 Ti is 20-24%.
In Hitman, the GeForce GTX 750 outperforms the Radeon R7 260 and even shows a tiny advantage over the Radeon R7 260X 1GB. The lag behind the GeForce GTX 750 Ti is no more than 15%, which is compensated by overclocking. Higher frequencies allow you to bypass the GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost.
At the Ashes level, we see a difference of 6-13% between NVIDIA's junior participants in favor of the GeForce GTX 750. The newcomer wins 2-3% over the Radeon R7 260X 1GB. ASUS is faster than the older version of the Radeon R7 260X. The difference between the two representatives of the GTX 750 series is 16-22%.
In the built-in benchmark, the ratio between GeForce GTX 750 and Radeon R7 260X shifts towards AMD. The advantage over the Radeon R7 260 remains.
The newcomer confidently outperforms the GeForce GTX 650 Ti, but falls slightly short of the Radeon R7 260. ASUS is slightly behind the Radeon R7 260X. The difference with the older GeForce GTX 750 Ti is less than 13%, which is easily compensated by overclocking.
The new GeForce GTX 750 is inferior to the old GeForce GTX 650 Ti by 3% in terms of minimum fps, but beats it by 6% in terms of average. A modest 4% lag in the average gaming frame rate relative to the Radeon R7 260X is combined with a 22% difference in the minimum parameter in favor of this AMD representative. The advantage of the GeForce GTX 750 Ti over its younger counterpart reaches 15-17%. The latter easily covers this with its overclocking.
In Splinter Cell, the newcomer outperforms the Radeon R7 260. We can talk about parity between ASUS and the Radeon R7 260X 1GB. Overclocking allows you to demonstrate the performance level of the GeForce GTX 750 Ti and Radeon HD 7850.
The performance of a simple GeForce GTX 750 is at the level of the Radeon R7 260. The newcomer loses up to 5% to the old NVIDIA representative. ASUS is already on par with the GeForce GTX 650 Ti, showing at the same time a tiny lag behind the Radeon R7 260X 1GB. Overclocking allows you to overtake the GeForce GTX 750 Ti and reduce the gap from the Radeon HD 7850 to 4-5%.
The GeForce GTX 750 is 2% faster than the GeForce GTX 650 Ti and 5% better than the Radeon R7 260. ASUS is 5% faster than the reference. The difference between GeForce GTX 750 and GeForce GTX 750 Ti is less than 17%. At frequencies of 1194-1349/6010 MHz, the newcomer is inferior to the Radeon HD 7850 by less than one percent.
In the most latest version 3DMark advantage over its predecessor reaches 11%. Same difference with Radeon R7 260X 1GB. The newcomer Radeon R7 260 snatches a couple of percent. The lag behind the GeForce GTX 750 Ti is at the standard level of 17%.
Energy consumption
Quite expectedly, the newcomer turned out to be the most economical among all participants. Moreover, a system with a GeForce GTX 750 shows up to a 13 W difference compared to the power consumption of a system based on a GeForce GTX 750 Ti. But you should understand that these values were obtained using specific non-reference video card models.
Conclusions
Based on the testing results, we can state the closest results for the GeForce GTX 750 and Radeon R7 260. The NVIDIA newcomer outperforms its opponent in nine out of 21 tests. But only in five games does the AMD opponent clearly win. In other cases, we can talk about approximate parity, when one of the opponents is better in terms of the average game parameter, and the second is better in terms of minimum fps. Radeon R7 260X already looks more confident. The new GeForce manages to beat such a competitor in only five tests. Although in many cases the difference is still not critical and is easily compensated by increasing the frequencies of the GeForce GTX 750. It is pleasant to note the increase in performance relative to the GeForce GTX 650 Ti in the vast majority of games. A slight advantage for the old one is observed only in four cases; in other applications the GeForce GTX 750 is faster, albeit by a minimal margin. This ratio between two GeForces of different generations remains the same during overclocking. However, our GeForce GTX 650 Ti is not the best in this regard. It is possible that the top versions of the old video adapter will be stronger than the new one. But the GeForce GTX 750 also has low power consumption. In this regard, the affordable Maxwell is better than all its closest competitors from AMD and NVIDIA.
Another important advantage is that the low heat dissipation of the GM107 allows even simple systems cooling to maintain low operating temperatures and low noise levels. It is worth noting the good overclocking potential. In our specific case, we were able to obtain an increase of 15-20% relative to the recommended frequency configuration. Such overclocking sometimes allows you to catch up with the older GeForce GTX 750 Ti with a large amount of memory. So at the moment, the GeForce GTX 750 is the most progressive and best combination of consumer characteristics video card in its price segment. The only real drawback can be considered the inflated prices in our retail stores. This already makes you think about buying a Radeon or even an old GeForce GTX 650 Ti. But after prices normalize, competitors of the GeForce GTX 750 will have a hard time.
The reviewed ASUS GTX750-PHOC-1GD5 card is more interesting than the reference, although it doesn’t stand out in anything special. Cooling is better than a standard cooler mainly due to the larger fan, but this is enough for comfortable acoustic mode. Factory overclocking provides an additional 4-6% performance, which is a nice addition. And the overall frequency potential is quite decent. With careful selection of the final frequencies, it is quite possible to operate the video card in quiet mode.
The other day the GeForce GTX 750 Ti video adapter based on the new Maxwell architecture was officially presented. The newcomer aroused great interest, demonstrating good performance for its price category with very low power consumption. When overclocked, this video accelerator successfully competes with lower-end 256-bit graphics solutions, heats up slightly and does not require an additional power connector at all. However, the latter was still implemented in some models. Among such unique ones with additional power supply was ASUS GTX750TI-OC-2GD5. Will this help raise the overclocking bar? Let's find out now.
Following tradition, we start by inspecting the packaging. This is a small box with a standard ASUS design.
There are no additional accessories. Inside, in addition to the video card itself, there is only a disk with software and a brief instruction.
Externally, the new model is no different from a typical representative of the budget segment with two fans made by ASUS. There are no visual differences from the R7260-1GD5 or GTX650TI-1GD5.
The total length fits into 21 centimeters, but the printed circuit board is even shorter. Therefore, the cooler protrudes noticeably above it on the reverse side. Immediately noteworthy is the presence of a power connector, which is located very close to the external interface connectors. It’s hard to call this arrangement convenient, because inside the case the corresponding power cable will interfere with the cooler on the processor.
Communication capabilities are represented by one mini-HDMI connector, two DVI connectors and an analog D-Sub connector.
The cooling system is completely identical to that of the ASUS GTX650TI-1GD5. Solid aluminum construction with wide ribs. No heat pipes or copper bases. Instead of thermal pads for contact with memory chips, the area around the GPU is covered with a dielectric film.
The plastic casing clings to the radiator thanks to latches. Dismantling it does not cause any problems - very useful if you decide to clean the cooler from accumulated dust.
A pair of thin FirstD FD7010H12S fans with a standard size of 80 mm (actual impeller diameter 75 mm) is responsible for the airflow.
The design of the board looks more interesting than the standard one. The GPU voltage converter will count three phases instead of the standard two. Power controller uP1608TK. The unusual location of the connector for connecting additional power lines has already been noted above.
The GM107 GPU is located on a substrate without a protective frame.
The memory capacity is standard - two gigabytes, equipped with four Samsung K5G41325FC-HC03 microcircuits. The exact same chips are used in the MSI N750Ti TF 2GD5/OC.
The base GPU frequency of this model was initially increased from 1020 to 1085 MHz with a stated Boost Clock of 1150 MHz.
The GPU-Z utility determined ASIC Quality to be 85.3%.
The video card was warmed up in an open case at 25 °C indoors. The Unigine Valley benchmark test (1920x1080, Ultra) was selected as a warm-up program - quite “hot” compared to many gaming applications, but inferior in this criterion to stress tests. Based on the results of a continuous 12-minute load, the graphics core did not warm up above 65 °C at average speed fans 1950 rpm, which is quite comparable to the performance of the ASUS GTX650TI-1GD5. The MSI N750Ti TF 2GD5/OC is a little cooler and much quieter, although ASUS cannot talk about any noticeable acoustic discomfort.
If additional power provides any advantages to this version of the GeForce GTX 750 Ti, then with restrictions on the maximum base frequency and a fixed power limit, the GM107 still has no practical benefit. It was possible to accelerate the GPU to exactly the same level as previously demonstrated by the MSI N750Ti TF. With a base value of 1202 MHz, the Boost ceiling was 1358 MHz. In the Unigine Valley benchmark, the frequency dropped to 1333 MHz, which fully corresponds to the frequency drops on the forced MSI. The only pleasant thing that can be considered is the fact that in this case there are fewer such drawdowns on the monitoring chart.
But my memory failed me a little. It was not possible to achieve stability above 5880 MHz. One cannot help but remember that the entire line of ASUS GeForce GTX 650 and GTX 650 Ti products with a single PCB design were characterized by weak memory potential. It looks like the new GeForce GM107 is ready to take over this baton.
To increase stability, the speed of the blowing fans was slightly increased to 2150-2200 rpm. The noise level was average. Characteristics of tested video cards
In this testing, we could not ignore the recently reviewed MSI N750Ti TF 2GD5/OC video adapter. Comparing its results with ASUS will help determine the importance of memory frequency during identical GPU overclocking. MSI will also act as a reference representative with Boost at 1150 MHz. All other participants are also borrowed from the previous review. The honor of the Radeon R7 260X series will be defended by two recent heroes of our review section - Gigabyte GV-R726XOC-1GD and MSI R7 260X 2GD5 OC. The GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost will be performed by Inno3D iChill HerculeZ 2000 at specially adjusted frequencies, so that the final Boost indicators are close to the frequencies of the standard version. Similarly, the standard version of the GeForce GTX 660 was obtained from the MSI N660 TF 2GD5/OC. The most powerful participant is the Radeon R9 270 (ASUS R9270-DC2OC-2GD5).
Below are the official frequency data. The graphs show the full range of NVIDIA core operating frequencies, including peak Boost values.
| Video adapter | GeForce GTX 660 | MSI N750Ti TF 2GD5/OC | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost | GeForce GTX 650 Ti | Radeon R9 270 | Radeon HD 7850 | Radeon R7 260X 2GB | Radeon R7 260X 1GB | |
| Core | GK106 | GM107 | GM107 | GM107 | GK106 | GK106 | Curacao | Pitcairn | Bonaire | Bonaire |
| Number of transistors, million pieces | 2540 | 1870 | 1870 | 1870 | 2540 | 2540 | 2800 | 2800 | 2080 | 2080 |
| Technical process, nm | 28 | 28 | 28 | 28 | 28 | 28 | 28 | 28 | 28 | 28 |
| Core area, sq. mm | 221 | 148 | 148 | 148 | 221 | 221 | 212 | 212 | 160 | 160 |
| Number of stream processors | 960 | 640 | 640 | 640 | 768 | 768 | 1280 | 1024 | 896 | 896 |
| Number of texture blocks | 80 | 40 | 40 | 40 | 64 | 64 | 80 | 64 | 56 | 56 |
| Number of rendering units | 24 | 16 | 16 | 16 | 24 | 16 | 32 | 32 | 16 | 16 |
| Core frequency, MHz | 980-1033 | 1072-1150 | 1085-1163 | 1020-1085 | 980-1033 | 928 | 625 | 860 | 1100 | 1000 |
| Memory bus, bit | 192 | 128 | 128 | 128 | 192 | 128 | 256 | 256 | 128 | 128 |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory frequency, MHz | 6008 | 5400 | 5400 | 5400 | 6008 | 5400 | 5600 | 4800 | 6500 | 6000 |
| Memory capacity, MB | 2048 | 2048 | 2048 | 2048 | 2048 | 1024 | 2048 | 2048 | 1024 | 1024 |
| Supported DirectX Version | 11.1 | 11.2 | 11.2 | 11.2 | 11.1 | 11.1 | 11.2 | 11.1 | 11.2 | 11.2 |
| Interface | PCI-E 3.0 | PCI-E 3.0 | PCI-E 3.0 | PCI-E 3.0 | PCI-E 3.0 | PCI-E 3.0 | PCI-E 3.0 | PCI-E 3.0 | PCI-E 3.0 | PCI-E 3.0 |
| Declared power level, W | 140 | 60 | 60 | 60 | 134 | 110 | 150 | 130 | 115 | up to 115 |
Test stand
The test bench configuration is as follows:
- processor: Intel Core i7-3930K ([email protected] GHz, 12 MB);
- cooler: Thermalright Venomous X;
- motherboard: ASUS Rampage IV Formula/Battlefield 3 (Intel X79 Express);
- memory: Kingston KHX2133C11D3K4/16GX (4x4 GB, DDR3-2133@1866 MHz, 10-11-10-28-1T);
- system disk: Intel SSD 520 Series 240GB (240 GB, SATA 6Gb/s);
- additional drive: Hitachi HDS721010CLA332 (1 TB, SATA 3Gb/s, 7200 rpm);
- power supply: Seasonic SS-750KM (750 W);
- monitor: ASUS PB278Q (2560x1440, 27″);
- operating system: Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 x64;
- GeForce GTX 750 Ti driver: NVIDIA GeForce 334.69;
- GeForce driver: NVIDIA GeForce 334.67;
- Radeon driver: ATI Catalyst 14.1 beta1.6.
Test results
ASUS has identical results with the GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost in Black Flag. When overclocked, MSI turns out to be 3% faster than the review hero.
ASUS and MSI have absolutely the same performance in Batman at factory frequencies. In overclocking, ASUS is 6% weaker.
Insignificantly behind its MSI counterpart. When overclocking, this difference reaches 4%. ASUS, even at factory frequencies, is slightly faster than the Radeon HD 7850, and increasing the frequencies minimizes the lag behind the GeForce GTX 660.
Less than one percent difference between ASUS and MSI. Overclocking brings MSI's advantages to 3-4%. In face value, the review hero is inferior to the Radeon HD 7850 by only 3%. Increasing frequencies to 1202-1358/5880 MHz allows you to overtake the GeForce GTX 660.
A strange situation is observed in. A disproportionately sharp jump in the minimum fps with increasing operating frequencies. At the same time, at nominal and overclocked, both GTX 750 Ti models have identical indicators. At initial frequencies, ASUS has a slight difference with the Radeon R9 270, and overclocking allows it to outperform the GeForce GTX 660.
The GeForce GTX 750 Ti is losing ground a little. Here even the gap from the Radeon R7 260X is very modest. In overclocking, ASUS does not reach the level of the Radeon HD 7850.
We see almost identical results from ASUS and Radeon HD 7850 even at factory frequencies. The increase from overclocking is 10-12%. GeForce GTX 660 is unattainable in this game.
There is an advantage of about 4% relative to the reference GeForce GTX 750 Ti and the same performance with the Radeon HD 7850. The increase from overclocking is 10%.
Once again ASUS turns out to be slightly better than MSI. The hero of the review is faster than the GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost and is not inferior to this brother in overclocking. The slight lag behind the Radeon HD 7850 is easily compensated by increasing frequencies.
In Hitman, the advantage over the reference is 3-4%. The lag behind the Radeon HD 7850 is 2-3%. Overclocking speeds up ASUS by another 7-8%.
At the Ashes level in the game
Now the Radeon HD 7850 beats the ASUS GTX750TI-OC-2GD5 by 3%. But the latter easily compensates for this with overclocking.
Energy consumption
The MSI GTX 750 Ti has already demonstrated low power consumption, but ASUS turned out to be even more economical.
Conclusions
The reviewed ASUS GTX750TI-OC-2GD5 video card demonstrated good temperature and noise characteristics at nominal values, but not as outstanding as those of the MSI N750Ti TF 2GD5/OC. The performance of both of these cards at factory frequencies is as close as possible. There is a trend where ASUS is a little weaker. But this difference is so tiny that it does not play any practical role. GPU overclocking is standard. It only confirms our assumption that all variations of the GeForce GTX 750 Ti that will be released have the same potential. So the performance gain will largely depend on the memory potential. And here ASUS loses to its rival. The GTX750TI-OC-2GD5 is approximately 10% inferior to the mentioned MSI N750Ti TF 2GD5/OC video adapter in terms of maximum memory frequency, which results in a performance lag of 3-7%. Still, ASUS holds its own against the Radeon HD 7850. And the power consumption figures are even better than those of MSI. So the ASUS GTX750TI-OC-2GD5, although it does not reach the level of the best representatives of the GTX 750 Ti series, is still a worthy candidate for purchase.
This video card is the first to be assembled on the Maxwell architecture. It consumes much less energy than all previous models and is highly efficient. It has also attracted fans of overclocking video cards, as it has good capabilities for this. Many manufacturers took advantage of this and released several versions of it at once.
For example, we can highlight EVGA - they released 4 models at once, and ASUS - 3. And of course, Gigabyte, MSI and Palit did their best, we will discuss them a little later.
Specifications
Additional Features
Manufacturers
Gigabyte GeForce GTX 750 Ti OC 2 GB (GV-N75TWF2OC-2GI)
Gigabyte released three versions of the card, but this one is the best, and has the fastest core frequency.
It is made in China and comes with a 3-year warranty. The retail price started at 5,600 rubles.
The model is compact and at the same time attractive. The fan has translucent blades, which is pleasing to the eye.
The design is slightly spoiled by the heat pipe that goes up, but that's okay, because you can ignore it.
The Nvidia version has three outputs: DVI-I, DVI-D and one mini HDMI, while Gigabyte has DVI-I and DVI-D (both Dual-Link), as well as two full HDMI connectors version 1.4a.
The last two make it possible to output images in UltraHD.
This card does not need additional power, but when compared with the reference card, Gigabyte installed a connector for additional power. This was not difficult to do, since the original printed circuit board is used, which already has contacts for it.
The power of the power supply that is required is slightly increased from 300 to 400 W.
The video card has 2 GB of GDDR5 video memory. It operates at a clock frequency of 5400 MHz.
Gigabyte GeForce GTX 750 Ti OC has a fairly simple, convenient and effective cooling system.
The maximum temperature of the GPU, which was recorded during tests, was 54 degrees, despite the fact that the fan was running at maximum speed in automatic mode.
The graphics core was decently overclocked at the factory, and there was no hope for any further overclocking, but we still managed to add 60 MHz to the graphics processor, and raise the video memory to 1160 MHz, despite the fact that the image remained at a decent level, without defects .
MSI GeForce GTX 750 Ti Gaming 2 GB (N750Ti GAMING 2GD5/OC)
MSI tried even harder and released 4 video cards at once. Each of which has a different amount of video memory and frequency.
The card manufacturer is China. It comes with a 2-year warranty. Sales in Russia started at a price of 5,400 rubles.
Any fan of MSI products will recognize the style of the card. Its entire front side is hidden under two fans.
The output panel has one DVI-D, one D-Sub and one HDMI quite old version 1.2.
You need a power supply with a power of at least 400 watts
The initial processor clock frequency is 1085 MHz. In boost mode, it is possible to increase up to 1163 MHz.
The model has 2 gigabytes of video memory. It operates at a frequency of 5400 MHz.
The video adapter has a stripped-down version of the MSI Twin Frozr IV cooling system. Its simplicity lies in the fact that instead of four heat pipes it has only two.
Graph. the processor heated up to 54 degrees, given that the cooler was operating at maximum speed.
The core can be overclocked to 185 MHz, and the video memory to 1240 MHz.
The final frequencies of the video card: 1270-1348/6640 MHz, and in boost mode we got an excellent result - 1414 MHz. Very good considering that after overclocking the temperature remained the same.
Palit GeForce GTX 750 Ti StormX Dual (NE5X75TT1341-1073F)
This company pleased us with only two video adapters. The most effective among them is StormX Dual.
It is produced, of course, in China. The retail price started at 5,200 rubles, and the warranty period is 2 years.
The design is certainly not the best, but it still looks acceptable. The entire front part is covered with plastic.
It has the following outputs: DVI, D-Sub and mini-HDMI.
The GPU operates at a frequency of 1202-1281 MHz. Video memory frequency – 6008 MHz. Volume – 2 GB.
The installed cooling system is StormX Dual.
The cooler is quite effective; the GPU temperature did not rise above 64 degrees during tests.
When overclocking, the results are slightly modest. It was possible to achieve an increase in the graphics processor by 55 MHz, and an increase in the video memory frequency by 640 MHz.
Final video card frequencies: 1257-1336/6648 MHz.
Comparison with other video cards
The table shows comparisons with such reference options as NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti and AMD Radeon R7 260X.
Overclocking
Using MSI Afterburner, you can increase the base frequency to 1155 MHz.
The video memory frequency can be overclocked to 6524 MHz. At the same time, energy consumption will also increase, so a balance is needed.
Overclocking also increased the heating of the GPU to 69 degrees.
Benchmark tests
Based on the tests carried out in 3DMark, we can say that video cards from different manufacturers do not make much difference. GeForce GTX 750 Ti is in the lead Palit GeForce GTX 750 Ti StormX Dual is in the lead.
Tests in games
Tests were carried out at maximum resolution in several popular games and the following results were obtained:
| Games | GTX 750 | GTX 750 Ti |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14 fps | 20 fps |
| GTA 5 | 16 fps | 20 fps |
| Battlefield 4 | 34 fps | 36 fps |
| Metro: Last Light | 15 fps | 17 fps |
Conclusion
We can confidently say that the video card has fulfilled its task. Energy consumption was reduced by almost half and productivity was increased. Although there are power restrictions, we still managed to overclock quite well.
It is certainly not a gaming video card and is even a little expensive for its performance. If its cost was within $100, it would be much more successful.
Hello dear friends!
As a supporter of the best, I am not used to denying myself, so I assembled the computer myself and only from expensive components. True, not all the hardware came out of the top category; due to a limited budget, I had to temporarily switch to an AMD Athlon II X4 750K and a cheap motherboard from ASRock. The processor and mother were purchased as budget ones, so that they would be enough for a more expensive video card and SSD. At the time, I was more interested in gaming, so a good graphics card remained a priority, as did an SSD. I approached the choice of a video card very sharply - below 7 thousand is not a video card. Therefore, the then-fresh GTX 560ti, with good factory overclocking and cooling, was chosen. And even now, after more than three years, I don’t understand how you can play on budget video cards. Now the computer has an R9 280X, some will call it a budget option, preferring the 780 from NVidia. But the 780 is not affordable for everyone, unlike the 280X.
In this article I want to look at a budget video accelerator from MSI - GTX 750ti TF. In fact, the review is not being done for the sake of the review, but to prove to myself and others like me that there is “life” below 7,000 rubles. It’s not for nothing that video cards are released at such a price.
Specifications
Model N750Ti TF 2GD5/OS
Video chip code name GM107
Process 28 nm
Base frequency of video chip 1085 MHz
Number of universal processors 640
Video memory capacity 2048 MB
Memory type GDDR5
Effective memory frequency 5400 MHz
Memory bus width 128 bit
PCI Express version 3.0
Video connectors D-SUB (VGA), DVI, HDMI
Maximum resolution 4096x2160
Audio output via HDMI There is
Need for additional nutrition No
Packaging and accessories
The packaging is made in the standard style and color for the Gaming series of video cards. The advantages of this series are briefly described on the reverse side. 
The package contains another black box with the Gaming series logo. It contains a booklet about the Gaming product series, a disk with software, a user manual and a card about the advantages of a dual BIOS video card. There are no DVI-VGA or molex--6pin adapters, since they are not needed - the card only needs power via the PCI bus -E, and the monitor can be connected via VGA. 
The video card itself lies securely in an antistatic bag, protected by foam rubber. 
Appearance and Design
The video card is made in black colors, with a red insert along the length of the plastic casing, and the Gaming logo in the middle. 
The length of the video card is only 250 mm, don’t be afraid - it will fit in almost the shortest cases.
The board is 37 mm wide, so it can easily cover a couple of slots on the motherboard. 
On the reverse side you can see a metal stiffener, designed to increase the resistance of the video card board to bending under the weight of the cooling system. It looks a little dubious, not in terms of strength, but in terms of necessity - the CO of the video card is not so heavy as to strengthen the PCB with additional metal. 
Not really used to connect a monitor standard set- HDMI, DVI-D and even D-Sub, which will significantly simplify connecting the monitor; you won’t have to go to the store if you forgot the adapter. 
Cooling system
The video card is equipped with an MSI Twin Frozr IV cooling system. It consists of a pair of heat pipes, with direct contact with the processor crystal. 
The aluminum radiator consists of 36 plates and is pierced by a pair of copper U-shaped tubes of various thicknesses - 6 and 8 mm. MSI claims a doubled heat transfer rate due to proprietary SuperPipe heat pipes. 
The radiator is cooled by a pair of Power Logic fans with a diameter of 94 mm and marked PLD10010B12HH. The fans themselves are made using Airflow Control technology - specially curved edges of the blades direct a larger volume of air directly to the heat pipes, thereby allowing heat to dissipate much faster. 
The fans are connected to a 4-pin power connector. 
PCB
The printed circuit board is made in black color scheme. In the middle is the NVIDIA Maxwell GM107-400-A2 graphics chip. 
The video memory capacity is 2 GB. The memory itself is composed of four GDDR5 chips manufactured by SKhynix H5GC4H24MFR - 512 MB each. 
The uP1608TK PWM controller from uPI Semiconductor is responsible for managing the power of the GPU. 
The board for the MSI N750ti was based on some more energy-intensive card, since there is an empty slot for an additional power connector. The video card itself has enough additional power via the PCI-E line. To the left of the missing connector is the BIOS switch. The video card supports Hybrid BIOS technology, and the second position of the switch allows you to use UEFI BIOS. 
The power supply system is four-phase - three phases for the graphics processor, one for the video memory and circuits. 
Despite its low cost, the MSI video card is built using all proprietary technologies used in more expensive models from this company. Solid CAP capacitors with an aluminum core, ultra-low ESR resistance and a guaranteed ten-year service life are used. Economical Hi-c CAP capacitors with increased energy efficiency up to 93%, new SFC coils (Super Ferrite Choke) with a ferrite core with super conductivity, increased energy efficiency by 20% and energy capacity by 30%. In addition, they should be 35 degrees Celsius cooler during operation. 
Test stand
M/n ASRock Socket-FM2 FM2A75M-DGS A75
CPU AMD Athlon II X4 750K 3.4GH
CPU cooler Thermaltake V1
SSD Intel 335 Series 180gb
Railway SATA-3 1Tb WD Blue 7200rpm Cache 64MB
Ram DDR3 8192MB PC12800 1600MHz Kingston HyperX CL10-10-10
B/n Corsair RM 550
O/C Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate x64
Overclocking and tests
We start by identifying the video card by the system, GPU-Z helps. 
The video card was overclocked using MSI Afterburner. 1260 MHz for the graphics core and 6020 for the memory frequency turned out to be stable. All attempts to raise the memory frequency higher led to artifacts in tests at best, and system freezes at worst. 
Unigine Heaven Benchmark 4.0 (DirectX 11)
The video card passed this test without any problems in normal mode and without any hiccups during overclocking. 
But the video card passed this graphics test only without overclocking. When overclocking, literally after 10 seconds of the first test the video card froze. 
All tests in games were carried out at high settings at a resolution of 1920x1080, the latest drivers were installed with the latest revision 344.48.
The video card, despite its price, shows very good results. But it’s worth considering one important point - the settings in the games were not ultra. I wanted to test it on ultra to know what it was capable of, but after the first game I changed my mind about making fun of myself and the card - it was just a slide show. But even at high settings, almost any game looks great, considering its price and low requirements for the power supply.
Conclusions
I have definitely proven for myself that you can play well for up to 7 thousand rubles. The question is how long will this card last? Is there any point in buying it? The release of each new game raises the bar for requirements for video accelerators in computers. The next new and long-awaited game may present you with a choice - play at low FPS and graphics from past years, or go and fork out for a good video card. Everyone decides this for themselves.
As for the MSI GTX 750ti, this is an excellent video card for the money - it does not require a powerful power supply, is quiet and moderately productive (taking into account overclocking). And no need to think about my bias, I just really liked the video card. I happened to run various video cards from different manufacturers on my system - some don’t run at all, others make noise when heating up, and others need a powerful power supply. The only doubt that is not in favor of choosing the MSI GTX 750ti is its price. For its price and even a little cheaper, you can look at quite fast video cards that will show more playable FPS with the same settings. You don’t have to look far for examples - from the same NVidia GTX 660 and AMD R9 270. However, everyone is free to choose what they like, there is no doubt about one thing - MSI know how to make video cards and make them well.
Pros
-Low power consumption.
-Quiet and efficient cooling system.
-Price.
Cons
-Price.
I thank DNS and the Experts Club portal for the opportunity to post the material. Thank you for your attention, your SeamniOectacann.
GeForce GTX 750 Ti review | GPU Boost and Overclocking
Factory clocks and GPU Boost
We already know that the base clock speed GPUs Nvidia does not allow you to understand how the processor will perform under load, because if certain conditions GPU Boost technology is used.
The parameters of the base frequency and frequency in GPU Boost mode can be set by the card's partners in the firmware. Therefore, depending on the cooler and the card itself, there may be discrepancies within the Boost frequency range, even if the products have the same base clock speed. The following chart shows Gigabyte at its most modest limit. However, the card can support this frequency without fluctuation. The other three cards, which do not have auxiliary power connectors, show some changes in this indicator.
Overclocking? Yes, but minor
After extensive stability tests on partner cards, we came to the conclusion that the highest stable GPU Boost frequency is ~1.3 GHz. At this point the TDP limit introduces its limitations. Unfortunately it is set to 100%. Until Nvidia removes the barrier to setting higher power limits, you won't be able to squeeze more performance out of this graphics card (it's limited by the PCI Express limit of 75 W).
In terms of performance, the Gigabyte and MSI models turned out to be very close. The GTX 750 Ti Gaming OC was able to achieve a higher peak frequency, but the latter dropped very often due to TDP limitations. Gigabyte's solution demonstrates more balanced behavior. Additionally, the card runs at a fairly low temperature of 46°C despite overclocking.
First we'll compare the base clock settings with the observed GPU Boost clocks:
It is clear that the higher the overclocking frequencies, the more often the card lowers them. In practice, this means that you will not receive any special advantages during the game. Let's compare increased frequencies with normal ones in the game Metro: Last Light and Crysis 3, the indicators of which we normalized and brought to the average value.
Increasing the base frequency by about 14% (11% in GPU Boost mode) gives about a 7% increase in speed in games. At the same time, energy consumption barely fits into the power budget, and GeForce GTX 750 Ti does not exceed TDP limits. Short-term surges (102%) are immediately compensated by a decrease clock frequency. But by limiting the power limit to 100%, we got a fairly modest speed boost, regardless of whether additional power from the auxiliary connector was required or not. Before overclocking further, Nvidia needs to fix the power limit in software.
GeForce GTX 750 Ti review | GPGPU: floating point speed
Single precision is good. Double precision is bad
Nvidia Kepler GPUs offer double-precision compute performance at 1/24 FP32 compute speeds. Maxwell is even worse in this regard - 1/32. Of course, this is all theory. It is better to double-check this parameter in realistic tests.
The Folding@Home benchmark is especially suitable for comparing graphics cards with OpenCL. This time we will have to do without CUDA indicators, since the Maxwell-based card was not recognized correctly. You'll have to check this setting later.
How big is the difference between single and double precision calculations? Our test results showed a ratio of 8:1 per GeForce GTX 750 Ti(Maxwell). This is noticeably lower than GeForce GTX 760(Kepler) - 4:1 in our test (Explicit Solvent).
However, GM107 has a high single-precision performance. New model in this regard, it can compete with much more powerful graphics adapters. For double precision calculations, the computational throughput is a bit lacking.
Single-Precision or SP tests
Double-Precision or DP tests
It's hard for us to make any specific conclusion regarding the capabilities of the GM107 in FP64. We can say that the speed of calculations with double precision is bad, but with single precision it is good. In any case, the artificial restrictions that block cheap desktop graphics cards from making it to workstations still irritate us.
GeForce GTX 750 Ti review | GPGPU: Bitcoin, Litecoin, LuxMark and RatGPU
The following disciplines do not cover all aspects of computing general purpose(our test package also includes Photoshop, WinZip and video editing tests, which we were unable to perform). Still, they give a good idea of Maxwell's improvements over Kepler, as well as where Nvidia stands relative to AMD now.
BTC Mining
While the company hasn't provided details on the improvements, we do know that Maxwell is much faster at hashing than Kepler, which is reflected in its win over GeForce GTX 680 And GeForce GTX 770. However, in BTC mining GeForce GTX 750 Ti loses Radeon R7 260X and some other mainstream AMD graphics accelerators.
Naturally, Bitcoin is not the only cryptocurrency that relies on hashing. For example, MaxCoin is part of the SHA3 family, and is supported in new version CudaMiner. We became curious about the position GeForce GTX 750 Ti in relation to GeForce GTX 650 Ti and we ran the following SHA2 test in Sandra 2014:
DirectX Compute Shader registered a significant increase, but throughput via CUDA is simply amazing. Maxwell likely improved integer processing, which was slow on Kepler. We hope Nvidia will talk more about the capabilities of the new architecture.
LTC Mining
Bitcoin mining on CPUs and GPUs is practically irrelevant today only because it is simply impossible to compete with specialized ASIC and FPGA devices. But for at least a little while longer, Litecoin remains a viable option. Using a script (the key function of password-based inference) in the proof-of-work algorithm instead of Bitcoin SHA-256 complicates the development of special hardware. So the GPU is still at the helm, even though, due to ongoing difficulties, investment in components often exceeds the income from currency mining.
Historically, Nvidia cards have been competitively inferior to Radeons, which is why we're seeing them sell for $700 and up. However, improvements to the Maxwell architecture allow 60-watt GeForce GTX 750 Ti overtake 140-watt GeForce GTX 660 and get closer to Radeon R7 265(150 W), which after the premiere has not yet gone on sale, but is expected to cost $150. On the performance scale (in kH/s (kH/s)) per watt, Nvidia is ahead of AMD. Today, four cards with GM107 chips in a mining system will be able to outperform, while you will spend less money on the cards themselves and electricity bills.
LuxMark 2.0
LuxMark is another AMD stronghold, where the compute performance of its GPUs tends to be significantly higher than that of competing Nvidia solutions. In fact, Radeon cards are so far ahead of Nvidia that the latter does not even comment on these indicators, stating only that the company's gaming cards are not optimized for computing tasks.
But again, for a 60-watt card GeForce GTX 750 Ti I did an excellent job. It still lags behind Bonaire chip cards in this price segment. But compare its score (943) with the GeForce GTX 580 (893). In case you forgot, the 580 is a former flagship with a power consumption of almost 250 W!
RatGPU
GeForce GTX 750 Ti review | Professional Applications
AutoCAD 2013: 2D Performance DirectX (Cadalyst)
Despite the close results of all tested video cards, the model with the Maxwell chip showed a slight advantage. This test shows that 2D functions no longer access hardware directly (other than blitzing and stretching), causing bottlenecks to occur in other components of the platform. However, there is enough performance for any occasion.
AutoCAD 2013: 3D Performance DirectX (Cadalyst)
U GeForce GTX 750 Ti quite an interesting position in Cadalyst 3D. Improved single-precision performance is evident. After all, DirectX uses SP primarily in its libraries, and all the vertices and their transformations are useful most often in this simple 3D presentation.
Autodesk Inventor 2013: DirectX
We again use the extreme problem with 1000 cubes. Contrary to what we saw in Cadalyst, GeForce GTX 750 Ti performed quite as expected, given the position of this card on the market.
Maya 2013: OpenGL
And finally we have a benchmark that measures OpenGL performance. It is computationally intensive and memory dependent. The point is that theoretical performance doesn't reflect real-world behavior, and less powerful graphics cards often achieve better results, which is always interesting.
|
|||
|
| |||