GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 950 vs 750 Ti among Desktop GPUs


Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 21 more


T-Rex, Manhattan, Cloud Gate Factor, Sky Diver Factor and 1 more


Face Detection, Ocean Surface Simulation and 3 more

Performance per Watt

Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more


Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more

Noise and Power

TDP, Idle Power Consumption, Load Power Consumption and 2 more

No winner declared

Too close to call

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with GPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of GeForce GTX 950

Reasons to consider the
Nvidia GeForce GTX 950

Report a correction
Better PassMark score 5,206 vs 3,699 More than 40% better PassMark score
Higher effective memory clock speed 6,612 MHz vs 5,400 MHz More than 20% higher effective memory clock speed
Better 3DMark06 score 8,351 vs 5,378 More than 55% better 3DMark06 score
Higher pixel rate 32.8 GPixel/s vs 16.32 GPixel/s More than 2x higher pixel rate
Higher memory bandwidth 105.8 GB/s vs 86.4 GB/s More than 20% higher memory bandwidth
More render output processors 32 vs 16 Twice as many render output processors
Better fire strike factor score 44.05 vs 33.8 More than 30% better fire strike factor score
Higher turbo clock speed 1,188 MHz vs 1,085 MHz Around 10% higher turbo clock speed
Higher BioShock infinite framerate 63.2 fps vs 46.7 fps More than 35% higher BioShock infinite framerate
Higher crysis 3 framerate 29 fps vs 20.4 fps More than 40% higher crysis 3 framerate
Higher thief framerate 40.4 vs 27.6 More than 45% higher thief framerate
Higher memory clock speed 1,653 MHz vs 1,502 MHz More than 10% higher memory clock speed
Better PassMark direct compute score 2,495 vs 1,830 More than 35% better PassMark direct compute score
Front view of GeForce GTX 750 Ti

Reasons to consider the
Nvidia GeForce GTX 750 Ti

Report a correction
Higher texture rate 82.64 GTexel/s vs 49.2 GTexel/s Around 70% higher texture rate
Lower TDP 60W vs 90W Around 35% lower TDP

Benchmarks Real world tests of GeForce GTX 950 vs 750 Ti

Bitcoin mining Data courtesy CompuBench

GeForce GTX 950
214.87 mHash/s
GeForce GTX 750 Ti
182.53 mHash/s

Face detection Data courtesy CompuBench

GeForce GTX 950
60.21 mPixels/s
GeForce GTX 750 Ti
56.77 mPixels/s

T-Rex (GFXBench 3.0) Data courtesy CompuBench

Manhattan (GFXBench 3.0) Data courtesy CompuBench

Fire Strike Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Sky Diver Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Reviews Word on the street


Showing 25 comments.
I hear ya man! I live in Canada and our electricity (thank's to bungled wind power plans and green energy and idiot politicians) our electricity is ridiculous here too. Don't let the idiots rattle you (I know it's an old thread.) We have to watch our consumption too, just to afford it, thank's to the nonsense we have to endure. There is nothing wrong with your math, or your reasoning. I get it, totally. Your power bills look as insane as ours. So what can you do? Gotta conserve where you can. Every watt counts. We use LED bulbs, which are just fine, etc. etc. That's why when I bought my new system I went with the more recent generation of Intel CPU's and a bit lower Nvidia graphics card that take much less power (the Geforce GTX 950 and a 6th gen Intel i5) because all the others higher, required considerably more power and as for AMD's power requirements all around (graphics and CPU) and the generated heat from them are just ridiculous. My wife's and my systems are quite decent for gaming and each manages to run on a 435 watt PS. So, that's pretty damned good for up to date gaming rigs. Remarkable in fact.
This comparison makes NO sense at all! the gtx 950 is better in EVERYTHING but the 750ti still get a better overall score??? Magic or just gpuboss liking 750 more then 950
But with absolutely no information about the test system, which suggests they probably just guess at what it "should" be based on the hardware stats Which seems quite likely when you start to notice all the inconsistencies on the site compared to ones like kitguru who DO actually test the boards side by side and get very different results XXX Boss is fine for a first impression but nothing more I have been looking in detail at the 750 and 950 cards and TBH a better comparison would be a 950 vs 960 as the xtreme version which I just bought is "almost" as fast as the 960 but noticeably lower power and cost for the £119.99 I picked one up for making it a much better value purchase than any of the 750ti cards for its performance and not worth paying the extra in initial cost and electricity to run the 960 as impressive as they are
Which is best at gaming point of view out perform Nvidia Geforce OR AMD Radeon HD.PLZ don't discuss budget.only Discuss Performance for Every Day Games.which render games smoothly even have low specs. IN processors which is best AMD FX or Intel core i5/i7 etc.
The irony is that the "technology test" is what GPU boss scores mostly use - the same scores you claim were bogus. And no, GPU boss scores don't just go by clockspeed. Besides their useless direct hardware comparison and more useful gaming comparisons, they also use useful actual benchmark comparisons.
You're telling people to buy the highest end card but then claim it'll only last a generation or two? Are you an idiot or are you just new to buying graphics cards? Half the time, the immediate next generation is nothing but a refresh/rehash of the previous generation. See Radeon 6000s, Nvidia 500s, Nvidia G92s, AMD R200s, R300s, Nvidia 700s, etc. They were all rehash/minor tweaks on existing architechture. You need to wait at least 2 generations to see significant performance per power improvements. And if you're buying a high end card, you can easily last 2-3 generations without upgrading if you're willing to lower your settings a bit.
No it's not. The GTX950 is rated at 120watts max and the GTX750Ti is rated at 75watt max. The difference is 45watts max.
What the hell is wrong with this review...??? The 950 is better on every benchmark (it gets a 10 and the 750 Ti gets a 9,5) and then we get: Winner Nvidia GeForce GTX 750 Ti GPUBoss recommends the Nvidia GeForce GTX 750 Ti Seriously... Am I missing something here?
I have a gtx750ti it runs warm and performs good enough for me I live in las vegas its 118 outside if I got a better card which takes more wattage it would create more heat I don't need ...the A/C on all day as is and the pc cant be on more than 40 minutes due to overheating and I wish I was paying 300 try more like 450.00/month
I have bench mark both cards.and found no difference in performance while on playing same game .I have played crysis 3 on ultra settings without oc gtx 750ti avg frame rate was 52 and gtx 950 frame rate was 54 and on assasins creed syndicate on full settings average frame rate was 42 for gtx 750 ti and 46 was of gtx 950. 25 frame or 30 frames are sufficent for a smooth & full 1080 p (1920x1080 resolution 60 hz) HD game these calculations that these websites show you are only theoretical.actual performance should be different.A graphic card with 128 bit bus is sufficent in power & performance & you can play every game on ultra only your gpu should support the game's 3d engine & slight Display technologies .The Calculations that are shown you are only for attraction to product.A gpu with 128bit bus 1ghz clock with 2 gb ram is sufficent for every latest game.more than this is the waste of money and system specs are following ci5 3rd gen 8gb ram.if you have 750 than tere is no need of upgrading gpu 950 if you want to buy new one than 950 is better for a few bucks
it has alot of interesting side by side stats if you don't just go off the "gpu boss" score
totally agree but some people freak out and must have latest greatest architecture (with that higher number as a name) so they sell their perfectly great gpu for pennies on the dollar
time to get off the grid and go with windmill or solar least to help the issue...
You should check your insulation and the heat pump. Most likely your AC is dead, or you have terrible holes in your windows.
But we haven't seen an 1060 cards or the like, what i wanna see is low profile cards, the half height ones, like this 750Ti
Just read all comments, wtf i just read... it's easy to get lost sometimes...
This thread is from last year. Nvidia Pascal is out.
Asus released a GTX-950 2G that doesnt require a 6 pin. May be close to a 950 TI surfacing after 9 months. I wouldnt upgrade my kid's computer with the 750ti but on the fence about replacing the AMD card in my other kid's computer. (Reference Fry's $99 GTX950 after $30 rebate)
In my country, we pay approx 0.2 USD per 1kWh. Which means, that you would have paid two times more in our country,... Quite waste of an energy. How could you consume 3150 kWh over month? It makes 4.4kW constant load 24/7 over whole month,... How?? Isn't that quite silly? Btw, 400 USD is our minimum wage. And huge amount of population gets paid little bit higher, so we just couldn't afford such bill for electricity!
I had GTX 750 TI Storm DualX By Palit and it broke. They didn't build any so i had to chose another graphic card and i chose GTX 950 and payed some extra money. First i want to say that you do fel difference in all games, trust me.
what the fuss about the heat so much here, damn it's summer already here, so cool off guys. I came here to decide which one to upgrade, but it seems like a bad time for an upgrade. So, I would suggest people here to wait for the winter which would save your E-bills a lot and hold on to the good old card a little bit more.
in my country I pay $0,14 per kw :(
Guess i'm the only one that has a computer that puts off no heat, unless i'm gaming, and thats only a few hours a day.
Really? What exactly makes it crap?
comments powered by Disqus