AMD Radeon HD 8870M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Comparison

The AMD Radeon HD 8870M and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 represent two distinct approaches to graphics hardware from the same era, both built on a 28 nm process at TSMC but targeting different segments of the market. The data in the database shows a single direct benchmark comparison, yet the full specification sheets reveal substantial architectural divergence that explains their respective positions in the performance hierarchy. The GTX 750 holds a clear edge in the recorded OpenCL test, while the HD 8870M carries a higher transistor density and a newer API feature set, making the choice between them dependent on workload priorities rather than a simple performance sweep.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 wins the only head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database, the Geekbench OpenCL test, with a score of 9315 compared to the AMD Radeon HD 8870M’s 8462. This represents a 9.2% advantage for the NVIDIA part, a meaningful gap that positions the GTX 750 as the stronger option for compute-oriented tasks that leverage OpenCL. The GTX 750 also demonstrates versatility in the database with additional benchmark entries: it records 4274 in Geekbench Metal and 8078 in Geekbench Vulkan, whereas the HD 8870M has no corresponding entries for those APIs. This suggests the NVIDIA card has broader tested compatibility across modern compute frameworks, at least within the scope of recorded measurements.

The AMD Radeon HD 8870M, by contrast, does not win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, but its average benchmark score of 8462 sits notably higher than the GTX 750’s average of 7222. This discrepancy arises because the GTX 750’s average is pulled down by its lower Metal score, while the HD 8870M’s single OpenCL result stands alone. In terms of percentile ranking against all GPUs, the HD 8870M places at the 43rd percentile, while the GTX 750 sits at the 40th percentile, indicating that the AMD part is marginally better positioned relative to the broader GPU landscape despite losing the direct comparison. For users prioritizing raw OpenCL throughput, the GTX 750 is the clear winner; for those looking at overall standing across the database’s full GPU population, the HD 8870M edges ahead.

The nearest rival data reinforces this split. The HD 8870M’s closest competitors include the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 at 8458, the AMD Radeon 880M at 8436, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX at 8427, all within 0.4% of its score, placing it in a tight cluster of mid-range parts. The GTX 750’s nearest rivals, such as the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile at 7203 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE at 7171, sit within 0.7% of its average, showing it occupies a slightly lower performance tier on average. The Intel Arc A380, listed as a rival to the HD 8870M with a score of 8558, shows a -1.1% delta, meaning the HD 8870M trails it by just over one percent, a narrow margin that underscores how close these mid-tier parts are in practice.

Architecture Differences

The architectural foundations of these two GPUs could hardly be more different within the same 28 nm generation. The AMD Radeon HD 8870M is built on the Venus chip, using the GCN 1.0 architecture, and belongs to AMD’s Solar System generation under the HD 8870M series, specifically the HD 8870M model line, which lists London as its predecessor and Gem System as its successor in the database. It packs 1,500 million transistors onto a die of 123 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 12.2 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750, on the other hand, uses the GM107 chip, based on the Maxwell architecture, and belongs to the GeForce 700 generation, with GeForce 600 as its predecessor and GeForce 900 as its successor, and carries 1,870 million transistors on a larger die of 148 mm², giving it a density of 1.2.6 million per square millimeter, slightly higher than the AMD part.

The compute core configuration reflects the generational leap NVIDIA made with Maxwell. The HD 8870M fields 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units, yielding a pixel rate of 12.40 gigapixels per second and a texture rate of 31.00 gigatexels per second, with FP32 performance rated at 992.0 gigaflops. The GTX 750 reduces shading units down to 512, cuts TMUs to 32, and keeps ROPs at 16 equal to the AMD part, but it achieves higher throughput figures: 17.36 gigapixels per second for pixel rate and 34.72 gigatexels per second for texture rate, with FP32 at 1,111.0 gigaflops. Clock speeds play a role here, as the GTX 750 runs at a base of 1020 MHz and boosts to 1085 MHz, compared to the HD 8870M’s slower base of 725 MHz and boost of 775 MHz. This clock advantage explains why the GTX 750 outpaces the AMD card in raw throughput metrics despite carrying fewer shaders and TMUs.

Memory subsystems share a 128-bit bus width on both parts, but capacities diverge. The HD 8870M offers 2 GB of GDDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 72.00 GB/s, with memory clocks rated at 1125 MHz and 4.5 gigabits per second effective, while the GTX 750 steps down to 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory, smaller capacity but a higher bandwidth of 80.19 GB/s, with memory at 1253 MHz and 5 gigabits per second effective. The GTX 750 also lists a TDP of 55 W, a single-slot width, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the HD 8870M has no TDP or slot width recorded in the database. The GTX 750 includes display outputs of 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.4a, and its physical length is listed as 145 mm or 5.7 inches, whereas the HD 8870M lacks display output and dimension data.

API support also splits them. The HD 8870M supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the GTX 750 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD part thus carries a more advanced DirectX feature level, 11_1 versus 11_0, which can matter for certain legacy titles, while the NVIDIA part holds a newer Vulkan version, 1.4 versus 1.2.170, which may benefit modern Vulkan-based applications. Both are built at TSMC’s 28 nm node, but the transistor count difference of 370 million in favor of NVIDIA indicates a more complex chip, which aligns with the GTX 750’s higher clock speeds and bandwidth.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data consists of a single Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are unambiguous. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 scores 9315, while the AMD Radeon HD 8870M scores 8462, a delta of -9.2% from the AMD card’s perspective, confirming a solid NVIDIA victory in this compute workload. This 853-point gap represents roughly a tenth of the AMD score, a substantial margin that suggests the GTX 750’s higher clock speeds, memory bandwidth, and FP32 throughput translate directly into better OpenCL performance. The GTX 750’s FP32 rating of 1,111.0 GFLOPS exceeds the HD 8870M’s 992.0 GFLOPS by about 12%, and its memory bandwidth of 80.19 GB/s beats the AMD part’s 72.00 GB/s by about 11%, both factors that plausibly contribute to the benchmark outcome.

Beyond the direct comparison, the GTX 750’s other benchmark scores provide context. Its Geekbench Metal score of 4274 is notably lower than its OpenCL result, suggesting that Metal performance is not its strength, while its Vulkan score of 8078 comes close to the HD 8870M’s OpenCL score of 8462, though the two cannot be directly compared across different APIs. The HD 8870M has no Vulkan or Metal entries, so the database offers no cross-API comparison for the AMD part. The average benchmark scores further muddy the picture: the GTX 750 averages 7222 across its three tests, dragged down by the Metal result, while the HD 8870M averages 8462 from its single test, a figure that would rank it higher if averages were the sole metric.

The nearest rival lists add depth to this analysis. The HD 8870M’s closest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce MX330, scores 8458, just 0.1% behind, meaning the AMD part barely edges out a much newer mobile GPU in the database’s rankings. The AMD Radeon 880M follows at 8436, a 0.3% gap, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX at 8427, a 0.4% gap, all of which cluster within a hair of the HD 8870M. The Intel Arc A380 leads this group at 8558, putting the HD 8870M 1.1% behind, a small but real deficit. For the GTX 750, the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile at 7203 leads its rivals, just 0.3% ahead of the NVIDIA card, followed by the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE at 7171 and Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 at 7170, both 0.7% ahead, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 at 7157, 0.9% ahead. These figures show the GTX 750 sitting at the bottom of its rival cluster in average score, while the HD 8870M sits near the top of its own cluster, a reversal from the direct benchmark result.

The Verdict

The data points toward the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 as the stronger choice for compute-heavy workloads that rely on OpenCL, given its 9.2% lead in the only direct benchmark recorded. Its higher FP32 throughput of 1,111.0 GFLOPS versus 992.0 GFLOPS, faster memory bandwidth of 80.19 GB/s versus 72.00 GB/s, and higher base and boost clocks all support this conclusion. The GTX 750 also offers tested Vulkan and Metal performance, with scores of 8078 and 4274 respectively, giving it a broader benchmark footprint that the HD 8870M lacks entirely. For users who prioritize modern API compatibility, the GTX 750’s Vulkan 1.4 support is a clear advantage over the HD 8870M’s Vulkan 1.2.170.

The AMD Radeon HD 8870M, however, should not be dismissed. Its average benchmark score of 8462 is significantly higher than the GTX 750’s 7222, and its 43rd percentile ranking against all GPUs beats the GTX 750’s 40th percentile. Its DirectX 12 (11_1) feature level is more advanced than the GTX 750’s DirectX 12 (11_0), which could matter for applications that exploit the higher feature level. The HD 8870M also carries 2 GB of memory versus the GTX 750’s 1024 MB, a capacity advantage that may help in memory-intensive scenarios, though the GTX 750’s higher bandwidth partially compensates. Users who need a mobile-oriented GPU with greater memory capacity and a slightly better overall standing in the database’s rankings might find the HD 8870M appealing, but those who need raw compute performance should favor the GTX 750.

The nearest rival data reinforces the GTX 750’s position as a mid-tier performer that is closely matched with integrated graphics like the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile, while the HD 8870M competes with discrete mobile parts like the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 and older desktop cards like the GTX 675MX. Neither GPU is a standout in the current landscape, as both are marked end-of-life in the database, with the HD 8870M released in March 2013 and the GTX 750 in February 2014. The GTX 750’s launch MSRP is 119 USD, a fact that the database records but that does not alter its performance profile. In summary, the GTX 750 wins on measured compute performance and API breadth, while the HD 8870M wins on average score, memory capacity, and percentile ranking.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU performs better in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 scores 9315, while the AMD Radeon HD 8870M scores 8462, giving the GTX 750 a 9.2% lead in this test.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 8870M has an average benchmark score of 8462, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 averages 7222, making the AMD part appear stronger on average despite losing the direct OpenCL test.

Q: What is the difference in memory capacity and bandwidth?

A: The HD 8870M has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 72.00 GB/s, while the GTX 750 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory with a higher bandwidth of 80.19 GB/s.

Q: Which GPU supports a newer DirectX feature level?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 8870M supports DirectX 12 (11_1), which is a higher feature level than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750’s DirectX 12 (11_0).

Q: Does the GTX 750 have any benchmark results beyond OpenCL?

A: Yes, the GTX 750 also records a Geekbench Metal score of 4274 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 8078, while the HD 8870M has no entries for those APIs.

Q: How do their transistor counts and die sizes differ?

A: The HD 8870M has 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, while the GTX 750 has 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, both built on TSMC’s 28 nm process.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in several key specifications. The HD 8870M uses the Venus chip with a GCN 1.0 architecture, while the GTX 750 uses the GM107 chip with Maxwell architecture. Transistor counts are 1,500 million for the AMD part versus 1,870 million for the NVIDIA part, with die sizes of 123 mm² and 148 mm² respectively, giving transistor densities of 12.2M per mm² and 12.6M per mm². Base clocks are 725 MHz for the HD 8870M and 1020 MHz for the GTX 750, with boost clocks of 775 MHz and 1085 MHz respectively. Memory clocks are 1125 MHz with 4.5 Gbps effective for the AMD part, and 1253 MHz with 5 Gbps effective for the NVIDIA part.

Memory capacity differs at 2 GB for the HD 8870M versus 1024 MB for the GTX 750, while bandwidth favors the NVIDIA card at 80.19 GB/s versus 72.00 GB/s. The HD 8870M has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, while the GTX 750 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Pixel rates are 12.40 GPixel/s for the AMD part and 17.36 GPixel/s for the NVIDIA part, with texture rates of 31.00 GTexel/s and 34.72 GTexel/s respectively. FP32 performance is 992.0 GFLOPS for the HD 8870M and 1,111.0 GFLOPS for the GTX 750. The GTX 750 has a TDP of 55 W, a single-slot width, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the HD 8870M lacks these entries in the database.

API support differs with the HD 8870M supporting DirectX 12 (11_1) versus the GTX 750’s DirectX 12 (11_0), and Vulkan versions of 1.2.170 for the AMD part and 1.4 for the NVIDIA part. The GTX 750 lists display outputs of 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.4a and a length of 145 mm or 5.7 inches, while the HD 8870M has no display outputs or dimensions recorded. Release dates are March 2013 for the HD 8870M and February 2014 for the GTX 750, with the GTX 750 carrying a launch MSRP of 119 USD. The HD 8870M lists London as its predecessor and Gem System as its successor, while the GTX 750 lists GeForce 600 and GeForce 900 as its predecessor and successor. Both are end-of-life products using the PCIe 3.0 x16 bus interface.