AMD Radeon R7 M370 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Comparison

The GeForce GTX 750 and the Radeon R7 M370 represent two very different approaches to the same performance class, separated by roughly fifteen months of GPU evolution. The data shows a clear, consistent performance advantage for the NVIDIA part, but the AMD chip brings a distinct set of architectural compromises that make it a more complex story than a simple victory lap. This analysis breaks down the benchmark results, the silicon underneath, and what those differences mean for a user deciding between these two end-of-life products.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is unambiguous. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 750 scores 9315, while the R7 M370 manages 7063. That is a 31.9% delta in favor of the NVIDIA card. This is not a marginal victory; it is a substantial gap that indicates a fundamental difference in raw compute throughput. The Vulkan results tell a similar story, with the GTX 750 posting 8078 against the R7 M370's 6465, a 24.9% advantage for NVIDIA. Across both available cross-platform tests, the GTX 750 wins decisively, securing two wins out of two head-to-head matchups.

The average benchmark score reinforces this trend. The GTX 750's average sits at 7222, placing it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs. The R7 M370's average is 6764, which puts it in the 38th percentile. While both are middling performers by modern standards, the absolute difference of 458 points (roughly 6.8%) is meaningful. More telling is the rival comparison. The GTX 750's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile, with an average score of 7203, meaning the GTX 750 is a hair faster, leading by just 0.3%. The R7 M370, however, sits slightly below its closest competitor, the AMD FirePro M5100, which scores 6830, meaning the M370 trails that rival by 1%. The data suggests the GTX 750 is punching at the top of its weight class, while the R7 M370 is slightly below the middle of its own.

Looking at the individual tests, the GTX 750's wins are not narrow squeaks. The 31.9% OpenCL lead and the 24.9% Vulkan lead are consistent across different API workloads. OpenCL often stresses raw floating-point and memory throughput, while Vulkan is a lower-overhead, draw-call-heavy API. The GTX 750's ability to win by a wide margin in both suggests its advantage is architectural, not workload-specific. For a user, this means the NVIDIA card will simply feel faster in a broader range of applications, not just in synthetic tests.

Architecture Differences

The silicon inside these two chips could not be more different. The GTX 750 is built on NVIDIA's Maxwell architecture, using the GM107 chip. The R7 M370 is based on AMD's Graphics Core Next (GCN) 1.0, using the chip codenamed Litho. Both are manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but that is where the similarity ends. The GTX 750 packs 1,870 million transistors into a 148 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.6 million per square millimeter. The R7 M370 is a much smaller chip, with just 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, for a density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA chip is essentially double the physical size and transistor count of the AMD part.

This difference in scale translates directly into processing resources. The GTX 750 has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 render output units (ROPs). The R7 M370 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and only 8 ROPs. The ROP count is particularly telling; the R7 M370 has half the pixel-pushing hardware of the GTX 750. This explains the massive gap in pixel rate: the GTX 750 achieves 17.36 GPixel/s, while the R7 M370 is stuck at 7.680 GPixel/s. Fill-rate-bound scenarios, like high-resolution rendering with heavy post-processing, will heavily favor the NVIDIA card.

Clock speeds also favor the GTX 750. Its base clock is 1020 MHz, boosting to 1085 MHz. The R7 M370 runs at a base of 875 MHz and a boost of 960 MHz. Combined with the higher shading unit count, the GTX 750's FP32 compute is 1,111.0 GFLOPS, versus 737.3 GFLOPS for the R7 M370. That is a 50% advantage in theoretical floating-point performance. Texture rate tells the same story: 34.72 GTexel/s for the GTX 750 versus 23.04 GTexel/s for the R7 M370. The NVIDIA GPU is simply a more powerful processor on paper, and the benchmark results confirm that paper specification translates to real-world wins.

The Verdict

The data is stark: the GTX 750 is the superior performer in every measured metric. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, has a higher average score, and a higher percentile ranking. The 31.9% OpenCL lead and the 24.9% Vulkan lead are not noise; they are a reflection of the GTX 750's larger die, more shading units, double the ROPs, and higher clock speeds. For any user prioritizing raw performance, the GTX 750 is the only logical choice based on this fact pack.

However, the R7 M370 is not without a rationale for existence. It is a smaller, simpler chip with a lower transistor count, which historically suggests lower manufacturing costs and potentially lower power draw (though the fact pack lists no TDP for the AMD part, it lists 55 W for the GTX 750). The R7 M370's 2 GB of memory is double the GTX 750's 1 GB, which could be a factor in texture-heavy workloads at higher resolutions, even if the bandwidth is lower. The GTX 750 offers 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth over a 128-bit bus, while the R7 M370 has 57.60 GB/s on the same bus width. The NVIDIA card wins on bandwidth, but the AMD card wins on capacity. For a user who needs to fit larger textures into VRAM, the R7 M370 might be the more practical, if slower, option.

The verdict is clear for performance seekers: choose the GTX 750. Its benchmark dominance is overwhelming, and its architectural advantages are too significant to ignore. The R7 M370 is a chip that appears designed for a different purpose—likely a lower-power, mobile-oriented part (given its "Gem System" generation and PCIe 3.0 x8 interface) where efficiency trumps absolute speed. But in a head-to-head comparison of capability, the GTX 750 wins decisively.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every major specification category. The GTX 750 has a 1020 MHz base clock and 1085 MHz boost, while the R7 M370 runs at 875 MHz base and 960 MHz boost. The NVIDIA part has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, versus the AMD's 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Memory configurations diverge: the GTX 750 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 80.19 GB/s bandwidth, while the R7 M370 has 2048 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 57.60 GB/s bandwidth. Pixel rates are 17.36 GPixel/s versus 7.680 GPixel/s, and texture rates are 34.72 GTexel/s versus 23.04 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 1,111.0 GFLOPS against 737.3 GFLOPS.

The chips themselves are vastly different sizes. The GTX 750's GM107 die is 148 mm² with 1,870 million transistors, while the R7 M370's Litho die is 77 mm² with 950 million transistors. The bus interface differs: PCIe 3.0 x16 for the GTX 750, and PCIe 3.0 x8 for the R7 M370. The GTX 750 is a single-slot card with no power connectors, a 250 W suggested PSU, and 2x DVI plus 1x mini-HDMI outputs. The R7 M370 has no listed dimensions, power connectors, or display outputs, suggesting it is a mobile or embedded part. API support differs slightly, with the GTX 750 supporting DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.4, while the R7 M370 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 has an average benchmark score of 7222, which is higher than the AMD Radeon R7 M370's average of 6764.

Q: What is the performance difference in the Vulkan benchmark?

A: The GTX 750 scores 8078 in the Geekbench Vulkan test, while the R7 M370 scores 6465. The GTX 750 leads by 24.9%.

Q: How do the ROP counts compare between the two cards?

A: The GTX 750 has 16 render output units, while the R7 M370 has only 8 ROPs. This contributes to a significant difference in pixel fill rate.

Q: Does the R7 M370 have any memory capacity advantage?

A: Yes, the R7 M370 has 2048 MB of GDDR5 memory, which is double the 1024 MB found on the GTX 750. However, the GTX 750 has higher memory bandwidth at 80.19 GB/s versus 57.60 GB/s.

Q: What is the transistor count difference between the two chips?

A: The GTX 750's GM107 chip has 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die. The R7 M370's Litho chip has 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The GTX 750 boosts to 1085 MHz, while the R7 M370 boosts to 960 MHz. The GTX 750 also has a higher base clock of 1020 MHz versus 875 MHz.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 750 wins in every benchmark category measured. It is faster in OpenCL (9315 vs 7063) and Vulkan (8078 vs 6465). Its higher pixel rate (17.36 GPixel/s vs 7.680 GPixel/s) suggests it will handle higher resolutions and more aggressive anti-aliasing better. Its higher texture rate (34.72 GTexel/s vs 23.04 GTexel/s) means it will maintain performance better in texture-heavy scenes. Its higher FP32 throughput (1,111.0 GFLOPS vs 737.3 GFLOPS) indicates superior general-purpose compute performance. The GTX 750 wins on raw speed, bandwidth, and processing resources.

The R7 M370's sole quantifiable advantage is memory capacity. Its 2 GB of VRAM is double the GTX 750's 1 GB. This could be a decisive factor in scenarios where a game or application requires more than 1 GB of video memory to avoid texture thrashing. The R7 M370 also has a lower transistor count and smaller die, which, while not a performance metric, often correlates with lower power consumption and heat output in a physical system. The R7 M370's PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, half the width of the GTX 750's x16, also suggests it is designed for more constrained environments, like thin-and-light laptops. For a user who absolutely must have 2 GB of VRAM and is willing to sacrifice significant compute performance, the R7 M370 is the only option. For everything else, the GTX 750 is the clear winner.