NVIDIA
GeForce GTX 750 vs Radeon R9 290
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
AMD
R9 290
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GTX 750 and R9 290 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗R9 290 outperforms GTX 750 by ~19% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+19%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 32Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: GeForce GTX 750 (~13%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider GTX 750
- Lower stated power consumption
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 5.0 · Not supported
Reasons to consider R9 290
- Higher catalog performance index
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 2.1 · Not supported
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
NVIDIA
AMDPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3238
10046
100100
5656
Graphics card ranking
Positions 145–150of 321
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
GeForce GTX 750
173 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
GeForce GTX 750
Price $24.00Based on catalog performance per unit of current market price, not measured FPS.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
32
38Better
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
29
34Better
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
27
31Better
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100Better
46
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
52Better
46
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
HDMI
Device class
USB Type-C
DirectX
Vulkan
OpenGL
TFLOPSBetter
Power consumptionBetter
Memory busBetter
Clock speedBetter
Memory type
Power connector
Release date
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
VRAMBetter
Memory frequency
Max monitors
Max resolution
Memory bandwidthBetter
Interface
Power consumptionBetter
Process node
Architecture
Thickness
Compute API
Launch priceBetter
Shader units / coresBetter
Recommended PSUBetter
Length
Die sizeBetter
Memory cache
Transistor countBetter
DisplayPort
Upscaling
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares GTX 750 and R9 290 across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
GTX 750R9 290
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
161 FPS
184 FPS
1080p Ultra
111 FPS
130 FPS
1440p Ultra
61 FPS
80 FPS
4K Ultra
22 FPS
28 FPS
Counter-Strike 2GTX 750161 FPSR9 290184 FPSGTX 750111 FPSR9 290130 FPSGTX 75061 FPSR9 29080 FPSGTX 75022 FPSR9 29028 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077GTX 750104 FPSR9 290119 FPSGTX 75088 FPSR9 290102 FPSGTX 75044 FPSR9 29058 FPSGTX 75014 FPSR9 29019 FPS
Forza Horizon 5GTX 750131 FPSR9 290150 FPSGTX 75083 FPSR9 29097 FPSGTX 75055 FPSR9 29072 FPSGTX 75032 FPSR9 29041 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyGTX 75085 FPSR9 29097 FPSGTX 75070 FPSR9 29081 FPSGTX 75040 FPSR9 29052 FPSGTX 75015 FPSR9 29019 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100323817%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100364011%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100394310%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 10056560%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1001004674%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 10043467%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 10041459%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100394310%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 10045486%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100394310%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX11.012.0
Vulkan1.41.2
OpenGL4.64.6
UpscalingNot supportedNot supported
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0, CUDA 5.0OpenCL 2.1
Architecture and release
ArchitectureMaxwellGCN 2.0
Process node28 nm28 nm
Release date20142013
Device classDesktopDesktop
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count1870 million6200 millionBetter
Die size148 mm²Better438 mm²
Shader units / cores5122816Better
Base clock1020 MHzBetter947 MHz
Boost clock1085 MHzBetter947 MHz
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 3x16PCIe 3x16
Length145 mmVaries by board
ThicknessSingle-slotTriple-slot
Recommended PSU250 WBetter950 W
Power connectorNone6+8 pin
Display outputs and limits
HDMImini-HDMI 1.4aHDMI 1.4a
DisplayPortBoard dependentDisplayPort 1.2
USB Type-CNoNo
Max monitors34
Max resolution4096 × 21604096 × 2160
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM1 GB GDDR54 GB GDDR5Better
Memory typeGDDR5GDDR5
Memory bus128 bit512 bitBetter
TFLOPS1.1115.632Better
Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 32
- Specifications
- 0 / 70
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (5)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (5)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
- · Record changed: product_prices
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: GTX 750 or R9 290?+
GTX 750 has the higher overall gaming score, while GTX 750 offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
GTX 750 is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
GTX 750 is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
GTX 750 offers more overall performance, while GTX 750 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
GTX 750 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
GTX 750 is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
GTX 750 leads in combined 1440p performance. GTX 750 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
GTX 750 is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
GTX 750 is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
GTX 750 is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to GTX 750 if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.