AMD Radeon HD 8750M vs NVIDIA T600 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly between these two mobile-class graphics parts. The NVIDIA T600 dominates every recorded test, while the AMD Radeon HD 8750M has no recorded wins in the database. The only head-to-head benchmark available is Geekbench OpenCL, where the T600 scores 27875 against 5970 for the AMD part, a delta of 366.9%. That is not a narrow margin; it is a generational gap expressed in raw compute throughput.

Looking at the broader benchmark suite, the T600 produces a Passmark G3D score of 6479, a Passmark G2D score of 756, and a Passmark GPU Compute score of 2402. The AMD Radeon HD 8750M appears only once in the database, with its Geekbench OpenCL result of 5970 serving as its sole recorded measurement. The T600 also posts Passmark DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 scores of 114, 32, 49, and 25 respectively. None of these have a counterpart from the AMD side, so the database cannot award a win to the HD 8750M in any test.

The use-case split is therefore straightforward. The T600 is the only option here for any workload that stresses OpenCL compute, which covers GPU-accelerated rendering, physics simulation, and general-purpose compute tasks. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 25580 further indicates strong graphics API performance for modern rendering pipelines. The HD 8750M, by contrast, offers no Vulkan result and no DirectX benchmark results in the database, meaning there is no evidence it can compete in those areas at all.

For legacy DirectX workloads, the T600 shows a curious pattern: DirectX 9 score of 114 is its highest Passmark API result, while DirectX 10 drops to 32, DirectX 11 to 49, and DirectX 12 to 25. This suggests the Turing architecture retains strong fixed-function performance for older APIs but does not scale linearly with newer ones in these particular tests. Even so, the absence of any DirectX scores for the HD 8750M leaves the T600 as the only measured contender.

The percentile data reinforces the gap. The T600 sits at the 39th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the HD 8750M sits at the 34th percentile. The T600’s average benchmark score is 7035, compared to 5970 for the AMD part. That 17.8% gap in average score is consistent with the OpenCL margin, though the OpenCL test itself shows a far larger disparity because it directly stresses the compute resources where the T600’s architecture excels.

The Verdict

The data leaves no ambiguity. The NVIDIA T600 is the pick for anyone who needs compute performance, modern API support, or any form of GPU-accelerated workload. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 27875 is 366.9% higher than the HD 8750M’s 5970 in the same test. Its Passmark G3D score of 6479 places it in a different performance class entirely. The T600 also carries 4 GB of GDDR6 memory with 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth, compared to 1024 MB of DDR3 at 28.80 GB/s for the AMD part. That is a 8x memory capacity advantage and a 5.6x bandwidth advantage, both of which directly impact texture streaming and large dataset compute.

The AMD Radeon HD 8750M is not without a case, but that case rests entirely on absence of data. It has no recorded DirectX, Vulkan, or Passmark scores in the database. Its only measurement is the Geekbench OpenCL result of 5970, which is lower than every single benchmark score the T600 produces except for the Passmark DirectX 10 (32) and DirectX 12 (25) results. If a workload requires only OpenCL 1.x compute and runs on GCN 1.0 hardware, the HD 8750M might be sufficient, but the database provides no evidence that it wins any task.

Who should pick which? The T600 suits workstation users, CAD operators, or anyone running GPU compute in OpenCL or Vulkan environments. Its 4 GB GDDR6 frame buffer and 128-bit bus provide ample headroom for 1080p textures and moderate compute buffers. The HD 8750M suits only the most constrained legacy scenario: a system that cannot accept a PCIe 3.0 x16 card (the T600 uses x16, the HD 8750M uses x8) and needs only the bare minimum OpenCL compute. For every other case, the T600 is the only defensible choice.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records exactly one head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. The NVIDIA T600 scores 27875, the AMD Radeon HD 8750M scores 5970, and the delta is 366.9% in favor of the T600. To put that in perspective, the T600’s OpenCL score is nearly five times higher than the AMD part’s. This is not a marginal improvement; it is a full architectural generation of compute progress.

The T600’s nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970, which scores 7157 on average, a 1.7% delta against the T600’s 7035. That means the T600 is statistically a peer of the GTX 970 in overall average score, despite the GTX 970 being a desktop part with a much larger memory bus. The T600 also edges out the GeForce GTX 680M by 0.2%, the Radeon R5 M240 by 0.9%, and the GeForce GTX 675M by 1.3%. These are all within noise, but the T600’s OpenCL score is the outlier that separates it from those rivals.

The HD 8750M’s nearest rivals cluster tightly around its 5970 average. The Quadro K4000 scores 5982 (0.2% higher), the Quadro K620M scores 5957 (0.2% lower), the Radeon HD 8730M scores 5955 (0.3% lower), and the Quadro K4000M scores 5986 (0.3% higher). This tells a clear story: the HD 8750M sits in a dense pack of entry-level mobile GPUs, all within 0.3% of each other. The T600, by contrast, sits in a pack that includes the GTX 970, a far more capable desktop card. The difference in competitive positioning is stark.

The T600’s individual benchmark results show strength in compute-heavy tests. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 27875 is its highest recorded result, followed by Geekbench Vulkan at 25580. Its Passmark G3D score of 6479 is respectable for a 40 W part. The Passmark DirectX scores are lower in absolute terms but still represent functional API support. The HD 8750M has no comparable data, so the only true head-to-head number is the OpenCL result, and it is decisively one-sided.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in OpenCL compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA T600 wins decisively. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 27875 versus 5970 for the AMD Radeon HD 8750M, a delta of 366.9%.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon HD 8750M win any benchmark in the database?

A: No. The database records zero wins for the HD 8750M. Its only benchmark result is the Geekbench OpenCL score of 5970, which is lower than the T600’s result in the same test.

Q: How does the T600 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The T600’s average benchmark score is 7035. It is 0.2% ahead of the GeForce GTX 680M (7023), 0.9% ahead of the Radeon R5 M240 (6975), 1.3% ahead of the GeForce GTX 675M (6946), and 1.7% behind the GeForce GTX 970 (7157).

Q: How does the HD 8750M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The HD 8750M’s average benchmark score is 5970. It is 0.2% behind the Quadro K4000 (5982), 0.2% ahead of the Quadro K620M (5957), 0.3% ahead of the Radeon HD 8730M (5955), and 0.3% behind the Quadro K4000M (5986).

Q: What memory configurations do these GPUs use?

A: The T600 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The HD 8750M has 1024 MB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which API versions does each GPU support?

A: The T600 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The HD 8750M supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural eras. The NVIDIA T600 is built on the Turing architecture, using the TU117 chip manufactured on TSMC’s 12 nm process. The AMD Radeon HD 8750M uses the GCN 1.0 architecture, with the Mars chip on TSMC’s 28 nm process. The process node difference alone, 12 nm versus 28 nm, explains much of the performance and efficiency gap.

Transistor counts tell a similar story. The T600 packs 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 23.5 million per mm². The HD 8750M has 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, with a density of 12.3 million per mm². The T600 has nearly five times the transistor count, which translates directly into more shading units, more texture units, and more ROPs.

The compute resources are heavily skewed toward the T600. It has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The HD 8750M has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The T600’s pixel rate is 42.72 GPixel/s versus 6.600 GPixel/s for the AMD part, and its texture rate is 53.40 GTexel/s versus 19.80 GTexel/s. The FP32 throughput is 1.709 TFLOPS for the T600 versus 633.6 GFLOPS for the HD 8750M. That is roughly 2.7x the raw floating-point performance.

Clock speeds complicate the comparison slightly. The HD 8750M runs at a higher base clock of 775 MHz versus 735 MHz for the T600, and a boost of 825 MHz versus 1335 MHz for the T600. So the T600 actually has a significant boost clock advantage, 1335 MHz versus 825 MHz, which compounds its architectural lead. The T600 also supports FP16 compute at 3.418 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the HD 8750M has no recorded FP16 capability.

Memory architecture is another differentiator. The T600 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 at 1250 MHz with 10 Gbps effective data rate, yielding 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The HD 8750M uses 1024 MB of DDR3 at 900 MHz with 1800 Mbps effective, yielding 28.80 GB/s. Both use a 128-bit bus, but the memory type and speed create a 5.6x bandwidth gap.

Power and physical design also differ. The T600 has a 40 W TDP, is single-slot, requires no power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 200 W. The HD 8750M has no recorded TDP, slot width, or power connector data in the database. The T600 uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the HD 8750M uses PCIe 3.0 x8. The T600 offers 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs; the HD 8750M has no recorded display outputs.

The T600 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The HD 8750M supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both are end-of-life products, but the T600 was released in 2021, eight years after the HD 8750M’s 2013 release. The T600’s predecessor is Quadro Volta and its successor is Workstation Ampere. The HD 8750M’s predecessor is London and its successor is Gem System. Those generational differences are baked into every benchmark result in the database.