Intel UHD Graphics 750 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Comparison

The data shows a split decision between Intel UHD Graphics 750 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750, with each GPU taking one benchmark victory. The NVIDIA card wins decisively in OpenCL performance, while the Intel integrated solution edges ahead in Vulkan. However, the average benchmark scores tell a different story: the Intel UHD Graphics 750 posts an average score of 7441, placing it 3.0% ahead of the GTX 750's average of 7222. Both GPUs occupy the 40th percentile among all GPUs, indicating they serve similar performance tiers despite their architectural differences.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 dominates the OpenCL test with a score of 9315, outperforming the Intel UHD Graphics 750's 6743 by a significant 27.6% margin. This is the largest performance gap in the comparison, and it reflects the GTX 750's raw compute advantage in general-purpose workloads. The Intel GPU's OpenCL score of 6743 places it well behind, and this deficit is substantial enough to matter in any OpenCL-accelerated application.

The Vulkan results present a much tighter contest. Intel UHD Graphics 750 scores 8138, narrowly beating the GTX 750's 8078 by just 0.7%. While this win is small, it demonstrates that the Intel integrated solution can hold its own in modern graphics APIs, particularly in scenarios where driver optimization and architectural efficiency matter more than raw compute throughput.

Looking at the broader benchmark landscape, the Intel UHD Graphics 750's average score of 7441 places it within a narrow band of competitors. It sits just 0.1% behind the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (7447) and 0.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 350 (7425). The GTX 750's average of 7222 places it 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile (7203) and 0.7% ahead of both the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE (7171) and Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 (7170). Interestingly, both GPUs trail the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650, with the Intel part sitting 0.4% behind its average score of 7472, while the GTX 750 sits further back.

The Verdict

The data indicates that NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 is the stronger choice for compute-heavy workloads, leveraging its 27.6% OpenCL advantage to deliver a more capable overall package. The GTX 750's average benchmark score of 7222, while lower than the Intel part's 7441, is supported by a more consistent performance profile across multiple API tests. Users prioritizing OpenCL performance should choose the GTX 750 without hesitation.

Intel UHD Graphics 750 wins the Vulkan comparison, but its lead is marginal at just 0.7%. The integrated GPU's higher average benchmark score of 7441 suggests it performs more consistently across various test scenarios, but this advantage is not reflected in a clear head-to-head victory. The Intel part also benefits from being an integrated solution, which carries no additional power connector requirements and operates at a 15 W TDP compared to the GTX 750's 55 W.

For users seeking a dedicated graphics card with proven compute performance, the GTX 750 is the logical pick. For those building a system where integrated graphics suffice and Vulkan performance matters, the Intel UHD Graphics 750 offers a competitive alternative. The GTX 750's launch MSRP was 119 USD, though the product is now end-of-life.

Architecture Differences

The Intel UHD Graphics 750 is built on Intel's Generation 12.1 architecture and uses the Rocket Lake chip, manufactured on a 14 nm+++ process node at Intel's own foundry. This integrated GPU features 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 raster operation pipelines. Its base clock runs at 300 MHz with a boost clock of 1300 MHz. The architecture supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, with FP32 performance rated at 665.6 GFLOPS and FP16 performance at 1,331.2 GFLOPS (2:1 ratio). The pixel rate is 10.40 GPixel/s and texture rate is 20.80 GTexel/s.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 uses the Maxwell architecture with the GM107 chip, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This discrete GPU contains 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.6M per mm². It features 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation pipelines — exactly double the Intel part's counts in each category. Its base clock is 1020 MHz with a boost clock of 1085 MHz, and it supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. FP32 performance is rated at 1,111.0 GFLOPS, with no FP16 support listed. Pixel rate is 17.36 GPixel/s and texture rate is 34.72 GTexel/s.

The architectural philosophies differ fundamentally: Intel integrates the GPU onto the CPU die with system-shared memory, while NVIDIA builds a dedicated card with its own GDDR5 memory. This explains the GTX 750's higher fill rates and compute throughput, as well as its larger transistor budget and dedicated memory bandwidth.

Specification Differences

The most significant specification difference lies in memory. The GTX 750 features 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel UHD Graphics 750 uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth, making its memory performance entirely reliant on the host system's configuration.

Clock speeds differ notably: the Intel part runs at 300 MHz base and 1300 MHz boost, while the GTX 750 runs at 1020 MHz base and 1085 MHz boost. The GTX 750's higher base clock contributes to its compute advantage, while the Intel part's higher boost clock helps in burst workloads.

Shading resources are doubled on the GTX 750: 512 shading units versus 256, 32 TMUs versus 16, and 16 ROPs versus 8. This translates to higher pixel rate (17.36 GPixel/s vs 10.40 GPixel/s) and texture rate (34.72 GTexel/s vs 20.80 GTexel/s). FP32 performance is nearly double on the GTX 750 at 1,111.0 GFLOPS versus 665.6 GFLOPS.

Power consumption differs dramatically: the GTX 750 has a 55 W TDP with no power connectors and a suggested 250 W PSU, while the Intel part operates at just 15 W as an integrated component. The GTX 750 is a single-slot card measuring 145 mm (5.7 inches) in length, while the Intel part is an IGP with motherboard-dependent display outputs. The GTX 750 offers 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.4a outputs. Bus interfaces also differ: PCIe 3.0 x16 for NVIDIA versus Ring Bus for Intel.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics 750 has an average benchmark score of 7441, which is 3.0% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750's average of 7222.

Q: How large is the OpenCL performance gap between the two?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 scores 9315 in OpenCL, which is 27.6% higher than the Intel UHD Graphics 750's 6743.

Q: Does the Intel UHD Graphics 750 win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the Intel UHD Graphics 750 wins the Vulkan benchmark with a score of 8138, edging out the GTX 750's 8078 by 0.7%.

Q: What is the TDP difference between these two GPUs?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics 750 operates at 15 W TDP, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 has a 55 W TDP, making the Intel part significantly more power-efficient.

Q: How do these GPUs compare to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics 750 trails the GTX 1650's average score of 7472 by 0.4%, while the GTX 750's average score of 7222 is further behind.

Q: What memory configurations do these GPUs use?

A: The GTX 750 uses 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 80.19 GB/s bandwidth, while the Intel UHD Graphics 750 uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 wins in compute-intensive scenarios. Its 27.6% OpenCL advantage makes it the better choice for any application that leverages OpenCL acceleration, including scientific computing, video encoding, and certain productivity workloads. The doubled shading units, TMUs, and ROPs, combined with dedicated GDDR5 memory, provide a substantial raw performance headroom that the Intel part cannot match. The GTX 750 also wins on pixel rate (17.36 GPixel/s vs 10.40 GPixel/s) and texture rate (34.72 GTexel/s vs 20.80 GTexel/s), making it superior for traditional rasterization workloads at higher resolutions and detail settings.

The Intel UHD Graphics 750 wins in Vulkan performance, albeit narrowly. Its 0.7% lead in the Vulkan benchmark suggests better optimization for modern graphics APIs, which could translate to smoother performance in Vulkan-based games and applications. The Intel part also wins on power efficiency with its 15 W TDP versus 55 W, making it the better choice for low-power systems, compact builds, and scenarios where heat output is a concern. As an integrated GPU, it requires no additional power connectors and eliminates the need for a discrete card, simplifying system design and reducing potential points of failure.

For users with existing systems lacking a discrete GPU slot or those prioritizing energy efficiency, the Intel UHD Graphics 750 provides a capable integrated solution. For users building a dedicated gaming or workstation rig where compute performance is paramount, the GTX 750's superior OpenCL scores and higher fill rates make it the clear winner. The choice ultimately depends on whether Vulkan efficiency or OpenCL throughput matters more for the intended use case.