Contents:HighlightsSummaryGaming PerformanceBenchmark PerformanceTechnical SpecsRelated ComparisonsRelated GPUs
Performance
GeForce GTX 750 Ti
5,3785% of 104,598
GeForce GTX 1660292% better
21,063.520% of 104,598
The GeForce GTX 1660 has 292% better performance than the GeForce GTX 750 Ti for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
Performance per dollar
GeForce GTX 750 Ti
36.0922% of 161.45
GeForce GTX 1660166% better
96.1860% of 161.45
The GeForce GTX 1660 has 166% better value for the money than the GeForce GTX 750 Ti for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
Shop GeForce GTX 750 Ti
Shop GeForce GTX 1660
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Summary
#
About the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti GPU
The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti is an end-of-life desktop graphics card that released in Q1 2014 with a MSRP of $149. It is built on the Maxwell GPU microarchitecture (codename GM107) and is manufactured on a 28 nm process.
Memory
The GTX 750 Ti has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, with a 1,350 MHz memory clock and a 128 bit interface. This gives it a memory bandwidth of 86.4 Gb/s, which affects how fast it can transfer data to and from memory. GPU memory stores temporary data that helps the GPU with complex math and graphics operations. More memory is generally better, as not having enough can cause performance bottlenecks.
Cores and Clock Speeds
The GTX 750 Ti includes 640 CUDA cores, the processing units for handling parallel computing tasks. The GPU operates at a core clock speed of 1,020 MHz and can dynamically boost its clock speed up to 1,085 MHz. Complementing the processing units are 40 texture mapping units (TMUs) for efficient texture filtering and 16 render output units (ROPs) for pixel processing.
Compatibility & Power Consumption
The GTX 750 Ti is a compact, low-profile graphics card that fits into 1 PCIe expansion slot. It supports DVI, mini-HDMI 1.4a display connections. NVIDIA recommends a power supply of at least 250 W to handle the GPU's thermal design power (TDP) of 60 W.
Benchmark Performance & Value
The GTX 750 Ti has the 237th best 3DMark 11 Performance GPU score among the 543 benchmarked GPUs in our database. It achieves 5.14% of the performance of the best benchmarked GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090. Its 5,378 score and $149 launch price (MSRP) gives it a performance per dollar of 36.09. This is the 72nd best in value for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
About the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 GPU
The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 is a desktop graphics card that launched in Q1 2019 with a MSRP of $219. It is built on the Turing GPU microarchitecture (codename TU116) and is manufactured on a 12 nm process.
Memory
The GTX 1660 has 6 GB of GDDR5 memory, with a 2,001 MHz memory clock and a 192 bit interface. This gives it a memory bandwidth of 192.1 Gb/s, which affects how fast it can transfer data to and from memory. GPU memory stores temporary data that helps the GPU with complex math and graphics operations. More memory is generally better, as not having enough can cause performance bottlenecks.
Cores and Clock Speeds
The GTX 1660 includes 1,408 CUDA cores, the processing units for handling parallel computing tasks. The GPU operates at a core clock speed of 1,530 MHz and can dynamically boost its clock speed up to 1,785 MHz. Complementing the processing units are 88 texture mapping units (TMUs) for efficient texture filtering and 48 render output units (ROPs) for pixel processing.
Compatibility & Power Consumption
The GTX 1660 occupies 2 PCIe expansion slots. It supports DVI, HDMI 2.0, DisplayPort 1.4a display connections. NVIDIA recommends a power supply of at least 300 W to handle the GPU's thermal design power (TDP) of 120 W.
Benchmark Performance & Value
The GTX 1660 has the 109th best 3DMark 11 Performance GPU score among the 543 benchmarked GPUs in our database. It achieves 20.14% of the performance of the best benchmarked GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090. Its 21,063.5 score and $219 launch price (MSRP) gives it a performance per dollar of 96.18. This is the 18th best in value for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
General Info
General overview of the GPU, including details like its manufacturer, release date, launch price, and current production status.
| Info | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | GeForce GTX 1660 |
|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | NVIDIA | NVIDIA |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Turing |
| Market Segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release Date | Q1 2014 | Q1 2019 |
| Launch Price (MSRP) | $149 | $219 |
| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |
| Shop | Check Price | Check Price |
Gaming Performance
#
Select a game to compare FPS metrics
Black Myth: Wukong
Once Human
The First Descendant
F1 24
Senua's Saga Hellblade 2
Ghost of Tsushima
Dragon's Dogma 2
FPS Benchmarks
This table showcases the average frame rate (FPS) achieved both GPUs in at various resolutions. Frame rate is a crucial indicator of how smoothly the GPU can run the game. A higher FPS generally translates to a smoother gameplay experience.
- Frames Per Second
Black Myth: Wukong | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | GeForce GTX 1660 |
|---|---|---|
| Low - 1080p | -- | 42 FPS |
| Medium - 1080p | -- | 30 FPS |
| High - 1080p | -- | 22 FPS |
| Ultra - 1080p | -- | 11 FPS |
| QHD - 1440p | -- | -- |
| 4K UHD - 2160p | -- | -- |
FPS Source: Notebookcheck
Compare Frames Per Second (FPS)
The average frame rate (FPS) in can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative performance. Generally, higher FPS results in a smoother gameplay experience.
Choose Baseline GPU:GeForce GTX 750 Ti orGeForce GTX 1660
| GPU | Frames Per Second | |
|---|---|---|
| GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER | 19 | +73% |
| GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER | 13 | +18% |
| GeForce GTX 1660 | 11 | |
| GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER | 5 | -55% |
Compare Cost Per Frame
The average cost per frame in can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative value. Generally, a lower cost per frame implies better value for your money.
Choose Baseline GPU:GeForce GTX 750 Ti orGeForce GTX 1660
| GPU | Cost Per Frame | |
|---|---|---|
| GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER | 17.62 | -12% |
| GeForce GTX 1660 | 19.91 | |
| GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER | 21 | +5% |
| GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER | 31.8 | +60% |
Benchmark Performance
#
Performance
GeForce GTX 750 Ti
5,3785% of 104,598
GeForce GTX 1660292% better
21,063.520% of 104,598
The GeForce GTX 1660 has 292% better performance than the GeForce GTX 750 Ti for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
The GeForce GTX 750 Ti is ranked 237th with a score of 5,378, and the GeForce GTX 1660 is ranked 109th with a score of 21,063.5.
Performance per dollar
GeForce GTX 750 Ti
36.0922% of 161.45
GeForce GTX 1660166% better
96.1860% of 161.45
The GeForce GTX 1660 has 166% better value for the money than the GeForce GTX 750 Ti for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
The GeForce GTX 750 Ti is ranked 72nd with a performance per dollar of 36.09, and the GeForce GTX 1660 is ranked 18th with a performance per dollar of 96.18.
Relative Performance
The average score in the benchmark test can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative performance. Generally, powerful GPUs tend to have higher scores.
Choose Baseline GPU:GeForce GTX 750 Ti or
| GPU | Benchmark Performance | |
|---|---|---|
| GeForce GTX 1660 Ti | 22,891.5 | +326% |
| GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER | 21,980.5 | +309% |
| GeForce GTX 1660 | 21,063.5 | +292% |
| Radeon RX 5500 XT | 19,499 | +263% |
| Radeon RX 570 | 18,967 | +253% |
| Radeon HD 7970 | 7,770 | +44% |
| Radeon HD 7870 (GHz Edition) | 6,194 | +15% |
| GeForce GTX 750 Ti | 5,378 | |
| GeForce GTX 480 | 5,014 | -7% |
| GeForce GT 1030 | 4,727.5 | -12% |
Relative Value For Money
The average performance per dollar in the benchmark test can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative value. A higher score implies a better value for your money.
Choose Baseline GPU:GeForce GTX 750 Ti or
| GPU | Performance Per Dollar | |
|---|---|---|
| Radeon RX 470 | 98.46 | +173% |
| Radeon RX 6600 | 96.58 | +168% |
| GeForce GTX 1660 | 96.18 | +166% |
| GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER | 95.98 | +166% |
| GeForce GTX 1650 | 91.58 | +154% |
| GeForce GTX 970 | 48.73 | +35% |
| Radeon R9 390X | 41.83 | +16% |
| GeForce GTX 750 Ti | 36.09 | |
| Radeon R9 280X | 36.09 | -0% |
| GeForce GTX 980 | 32.07 | -11% |
Benchmark Scores
This table showcases the average performance scores achieved by both GPUs across industry-standard benchmark tests. These scores provide a valuable insight into overall performance. Powerful GPUs tend to have higher scores.
- Popular
| Benchmark | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | GeForce GTX 1660 |
|---|---|---|
| 3DMark Time Spy Graphics | -- | 5,439 |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | -- | 6,042 |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Graphics | 31,349 | 81,755 (+160.79%) |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Graphics | 4,294 | 14,164 (+229.86%) |
| 3DMark Night Raid Graphics | -- | 64,188 |
| 3DMark 11 Performance Score | 5,741 | 21,550 (+275.37%) |
| PassMark G3D Mark | 3,901 | 11,679 (+199.38%) |
| PassMark G2D Mark | 516 | 784 (+51.94%) |
| Unigine Heaven 3.0 DirectX 11 | 54.3 | -- |
Benchmarks Source: Notebookcheck
Technical Specs
#
Graphics Processor
General information about the graphics processing unit like their architecture, manufacturing process size, and transistor count. Newer GPU architectures generally bring efficiency improvements and may introduce technologies that enhance graphical capabilities.
| Spec | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | GeForce GTX 1660 |
|---|---|---|
| Codename | GM107 | TU116 |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Turing |
| Process Size | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Transistors | 1,870 million | 6,600 million |
Memory Details
Memory specifications like their capacity, bandwidth, and clock speeds. GPU memory stores graphics data like frames, textures, and shadows which helps display rendered images. These specs are crucial for graphics-intense applications like gaming and 3D modeling.
| Spec | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | GeForce GTX 1660 |
|---|---|---|
| Memory Size | 2 GB | 6 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 86.4 Gb/s | 192.1 Gb/s |
| Memory Clock | 1,350 MHz | 2,001 MHz |
| Memory Interface | 128 bit | 192 bit |
| L1 Cache | 64 KB | 64 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 1,536 KB |
Board Compatibility
Compatibility information like their slot size, bus interface, power consumption, and display support. These specs are useful for verifying compatibility with your motherboard, power supply, and monitor.
| Spec | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | GeForce GTX 1660 |
|---|---|---|
| Slots | 1 slot | 2 slots |
| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 60 W | 120 W |
| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 300 W |
| Power Connectors | -- | 1x 8-pin |
| Outputs | DVI, mini-HDMI 1.4a | DVI, HDMI 2.0, DisplayPort 1.4a |
Cores & Clock Speeds
Processing power information like its cores and clock speed. These specs impact how fast they can process graphics. Each type of core or component serves a specific computational purpose.
| Spec | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | GeForce GTX 1660 |
|---|---|---|
| CUDA Cores | 640 | 1,408 |
| Stream Multiprocessors (SM) | -- | 22 |
| Texture Mapping Units (TMU) | 40 | 88 |
| Render Output Units (ROP) | 16 | 48 |
| Core Clock Speed | 1,020 MHz | 1,530 MHz |
| Core Clock Speed (Boost) | 1,085 MHz | 1,785 MHz |
Theoretical Performance
Theoretical performance numbers derived from the raw specifications of the different components like core count and clock speeds. While these provide a glimpse into peak processing power, they do not represent real-world performance.
| Spec | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | GeForce GTX 1660 |
|---|---|---|
| Pixel Fill Rate | 17.36 GPixel/s | 85.68 GPixel/s |
| Texture Fill Rate | 43.4 GTexel/s | 157.1 GTexel/s |
| FP32 Performance | 1,389 GFLOPS | 5.03 TFLOPS |
| FP64 Performance | 43.4 GFLOPS | 157.1 GFLOPS |
API Support
Graphics API versions supported by these graphics cards. APIs evolve over time, introducing new features and functionalities. Older GPUs may not support recent versions.
| Spec | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | GeForce GTX 1660 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (12_1) |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.7 (5.1) | 6.8 |
Check out these comparisons for similar GPUs:
Looking for alternatives? Check out these similar GPUs:
* Performance rating, performance per dollar, and rankings are based on the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark and MSRP.