NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data splits these two NVIDIA mobile and desktop GPUs into a surprisingly close contest. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M wins the only head-to-head benchmark listed, the Geekbench OpenCL test, with a score of 4934 against the GTS 450's 4893. That is a 0.8% delta, a margin so thin that it falls within typical run-to-run variance. The GT 755M also has a second benchmark entry, Geekbench Metal, at 3132, which the GTS 450 does not have recorded at all.

The GTS 450, despite losing the head-to-head, posts a higher average benchmark score across all recorded tests: 4893 versus the GT 755M's 4033. That gap is misleading, however, because the GTS 450 has only one benchmark entry while the GT 755M has two, and the Metal test (3132) drags down its average. If you isolate the shared OpenCL test, the GT 755M edges ahead. So the use-case split is not about raw dominance; it is about what each GPU can do with the workloads it is given.

The GT 755M's strength lies in its wider software compatibility. It records a Vulkan 1.2.175 API support level, whereas the GTS 450 records no Vulkan support at all. For modern compute workloads that leverage Vulkan, the GT 755M is the only option here. The GTS 450, by contrast, shows its age with a PCIe 2.0 x16 interface and a dual-slot form factor, suggesting it was designed for desktop towers where expansion space is plentiful. The GT 755M uses an MXM module slot, indicating a laptop or small-form-factor design.

In terms of benchmark wins, the data is unambiguous: the GT 755M wins 1, the GTS 450 wins 0. But the GTS 450's single OpenCL score of 4893 is within 0.8% of the GT 755M's 4934, meaning that for OpenCL compute tasks, the two are effectively interchangeable. The real differentiator is not speed but feature set and power envelope.

The Verdict

Who should pick which? The data points toward a clear split. If the workload is OpenCL compute, the GT 755M is technically faster by 0.8%, but that margin is practically negligible. If the workload is Metal-based, the GT 755M is the only option with a recorded score (3132), as the GTS 450 has no Metal benchmark entry. If the workload involves Vulkan, the GT 755M supports it (1.2.175) while the GTS 450 does not, so the choice is forced.

The GTS 450, however, has one advantage that the raw scores do not capture: it sits at the 28th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the GT 755M sits at the 24th percentile. That means the GTS 450 is ranked higher relative to the entire GPU population, despite losing the direct comparison. This is likely because the GTS 450's single OpenCL score is compared against a broader set of GPUs, whereas the GT 755M's average is pulled down by its Metal score.

For a user prioritizing raw compute in OpenCL, the GT 755M is the winner, but only by a hair. For a user prioritizing compatibility with modern graphics APIs, the GT 755M is the clear choice. For a user who only cares about the highest percentile ranking in the database, the GTS 450 edges ahead. The GTS 450 also comes with a recorded launch MSRP of 129 USD, which can be stated once as a historical data point, but the database does not provide pricing for the GT 755M.

The verdict is not about which GPU is "better" in an absolute sense. It is about which one fits the task. For OpenCL, flip a coin. For Metal or Vulkan, the GT 755M is the only contender. For a desktop system with a 300 W power supply requirement, the GTS 450 is the intended fit. For a portable device, the GT 755M is the only option, given its MXM module form factor and 50 W TDP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records exactly one head-to-head benchmark: Geekbench OpenCL. The GT 755M scores 4934, and the GTS 450 scores 4893. The delta is 0.8% in favor of the GT 755M. That is a narrow win, but it is a win nonetheless. To put it in perspective, the GT 755M's nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB with an average score of 4093 and a delta of -1.5%, and the Intel HD Graphics 630 with an average score of 4075 and a delta of -1%. The GTS 450's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB with an average score of 4901 and a delta of -0.2%, and the AMD FirePro W5130M with an average score of 4904 and a delta of -0.2%.

What this means is that the GTS 450, despite being older and built on a 40 nm process, sits right next to modern GPUs like the RTX 5060 Ti in average score. The GT 755M, by contrast, sits near the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB, but its average is dragged down by the Metal benchmark. In the direct OpenCL comparison, the GT 755M is 0.8% ahead, which is smaller than the 0.5% delta between the GTS 450 and AMD Radeon R6 M255DX. So the head-to-head result is essentially a statistical tie.

The bigger wins are not in the benchmark scores but in the feature comparisons. The GT 755M has a 28 nm process node versus the GTS 450's 40 nm, a 1,270 million transistor count versus 1,170 million, and a die size of 118 mm² versus 238 mm². The GT 755M packs more transistors into roughly half the die area, resulting in a transistor density of 10.8M / mm² versus 4.9M / mm². That is a 2.2x density advantage, which explains why the GT 755M can achieve a higher FP32 throughput (783.4 GFLOPS versus 601.3 GFLOPS) while consuming 50 W versus 106 W.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL score in the head-to-head test?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M scores 4934, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 scores 4893, a 0.8% difference in favor of the GT 755M.

Q: Does the GTS 450 support Vulkan?

A: No. The database records no Vulkan API support for the GTS 450, while the GT 755M lists Vulkan 1.2.175.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The GT 755M has an average score of 4033, which includes a Geekbench Metal score of 3132 and a Geekbench OpenCL score of 4934. The GTS 450 has an average score of 4893 from its single Geekbench OpenCL test.

Q: Which GPU has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The GTS 450 sits at the 28th percentile, while the GT 755M sits at the 24th percentile.

Q: What are the memory configurations of these two GPUs?

A: The GT 755M has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 86.40 GB/s bandwidth. The GTS 450 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 57.73 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a lower power draw?

A: The GT 755M has a TDP of 50 W, while the GTS 450 has a TDP of 106 W. The GTS 450 also requires a 300 W suggested PSU and a 1x 6-pin power connector, while the GT 755M uses no power connectors.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different NVIDIA architectures and process nodes. The GT 755M is based on the GK107 chip using the Kepler architecture, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The GTS 450 is based on the GF106 chip using the Fermi architecture, built on a 40 nm process, also at TSMC. The transistor counts are close: 1,270 million for the GT 755M versus 1,170 million for the GTS 450. But the die sizes diverge sharply: the GT 755M measures 118 mm², while the GTS 450 measures 238 mm². That yields a transistor density of 10.8M / mm² for the GT 755M versus 4.9M / mm² for the GTS 450, a 2.2x advantage in packing efficiency.

The shading unit count also differs: the GT 755M has 384 shading units, while the GTS 450 has 192. Both have 32 texture mapping units and 16 raster output units. The clock speeds are not directly comparable because the GTS 450 has no base or boost clock recorded, only a memory clock of 902 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective). The GT 755M has a base clock of 980 MHz, a boost clock of 1020 MHz, and a memory clock of 1350 MHz (5.4 Gbps effective). The GT 755M's pixel rate is 8.160 GPixel/s versus 6.264 GPixel/s for the GTS 450, and its texture rate is 32.64 GTexel/s versus 25.06 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 783.4 GFLOPS versus 601.3 GFLOPS.

The GT 755M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The GTS 450 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but no Vulkan. Both are end-of-life products. The GT 755M was released on 2013-06-24, and the GTS 450 on 2010-09-12. The GT 755M's predecessor is the GeForce 600M and its successor is the GeForce 800M. The GTS 450's predecessor is the GeForce 200 and its successor is the GeForce 500.

Specification Differences

The specification differences are substantial and go beyond the architecture. The GT 755M has 2 GB of memory, while the GTS 450 has 1024 MB. Both use GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, but the bandwidth differs: 86.40 GB/s for the GT 755M versus 57.73 GB/s for the GTS 450. The GT 755M has a boost clock of 1020 MHz, while the GTS 450 has no boost clock recorded. The GT 755M's TDP is 50 W; the GTS 450's is 106 W. The GT 755M uses an MXM module slot, while the GTS 450 is a dual-slot card. The GT 755M has no power connectors; the GTS 450 requires a 1x 6-pin connector and a 300 W suggested PSU.

The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16 for the GT 755M and PCIe 2.0 x16 for the GTS 450. Display outputs are portable device dependent for the GT 755M, while the GTS 450 has 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a. The GTS 450 has physical dimensions recorded: 210 mm (8.3 inches) in length and 111 mm (4.4 inches) in height. The GT 755M has no dimensions recorded. The GTS 450 has a launch MSRP of 129 USD, which is the only pricing data in the pack; the GT 755M has no launch MSRP recorded.

The memory clock differs as well: the GT 755M runs at 1350 MHz (5.4 Gbps effective), while the GTS 450 runs at 902 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective). The GT 755M has 384 shading units versus 192, and it achieves a 783.4 GFLOPS FP32 rate versus 601.3 GFLOPS. The GTS 450 has a lower pixel rate (6.264 GPixel/s versus 8.160 GPixel/s) and texture rate (25.06 GTexel/s versus 32.64 GTexel/s). The GTS 450's transistor density is less than half of the GT 755M's, and its die is nearly double the size. These differences explain the benchmark results: the GT 755M wins the OpenCL test by 0.8%, but the GTS 450 holds its own in the 28th percentile ranking, likely due to the single high OpenCL score and the absence of a lower Metal score dragging down its average.