
GeForce GTX 750 Ti
Popular choices:

GeForce GTX 1060
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.
GeForce GTX 750 Ti
2014Why buy it
- ✅Costs $100 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $249 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 180W, a 105W reduction.
- ✅Measures 145mm instead of 173mm, a 28mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (3,900 vs 10,064).
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2014-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 26.2 vs 40.4 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $249 MSRP).
GeForce GTX 1060
2016Why buy it
- ✅+158.1% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Delivers 54.4% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 40.4 vs 26.2 G3D/$ ($249 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ✅50% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 4 GB).
- ✅Less risky long-term buy than GeForce GTX 750 Ti: it remains the more sensible modern option while GeForce GTX 750 Ti is already obsolete for modern gaming.
Trade-offs
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2016-era hardware with 6 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
- ❌140% higher power demand at 180W vs 75W.
- ❌19.3% longer card at 173mm vs 145mm.
GeForce GTX 750 Ti
2014GeForce GTX 1060
2016Why buy it
- ✅Costs $100 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $249 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 180W, a 105W reduction.
- ✅Measures 145mm instead of 173mm, a 28mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Why buy it
- ✅+158.1% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Delivers 54.4% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 40.4 vs 26.2 G3D/$ ($249 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ✅50% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 4 GB).
- ✅Less risky long-term buy than GeForce GTX 750 Ti: it remains the more sensible modern option while GeForce GTX 750 Ti is already obsolete for modern gaming.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (3,900 vs 10,064).
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2014-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 26.2 vs 40.4 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $249 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2016-era hardware with 6 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
- ❌140% higher power demand at 180W vs 75W.
- ❌19.3% longer card at 173mm vs 145mm.
Quick Answers
So, is GeForce GTX 1060 better than GeForce GTX 750 Ti?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
Is GeForce GTX 750 Ti still worth buying for gaming in 2026?
Games Benchmarks
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 9800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 33 FPS | 117 FPS |
| medium | 21 FPS | 105 FPS |
| high | 13 FPS | 91 FPS |
| ultra | 6 FPS | 77 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 16 FPS | 103 FPS |
| medium | 9 FPS | 87 FPS |
| high | 4 FPS | 76 FPS |
| ultra | 2 FPS | 67 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 5 FPS | 55 FPS |
| medium | 3 FPS | 49 FPS |
| high | 2 FPS | 41 FPS |
| ultra | 1 FPS | 37 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 80 FPS | 216 FPS |
| medium | 49 FPS | 181 FPS |
| high | 36 FPS | 148 FPS |
| ultra | 21 FPS | 113 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 37 FPS | 134 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 107 FPS |
| high | 17 FPS | 87 FPS |
| ultra | 11 FPS | 68 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 12 FPS | 62 FPS |
| medium | 9 FPS | 51 FPS |
| high | 8 FPS | 49 FPS |
| ultra | 5 FPS | 41 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 176 FPS | 453 FPS |
| medium | 140 FPS | 362 FPS |
| high | 117 FPS | 302 FPS |
| ultra | 88 FPS | 226 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 132 FPS | 340 FPS |
| medium | 105 FPS | 272 FPS |
| high | 88 FPS | 226 FPS |
| ultra | 66 FPS | 170 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 88 FPS | 226 FPS |
| medium | 70 FPS | 181 FPS |
| high | 58 FPS | 151 FPS |
| ultra | 44 FPS | 113 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 139 FPS | 358 FPS |
| medium | 112 FPS | 302 FPS |
| high | 97 FPS | 260 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 226 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 103 FPS | 299 FPS |
| medium | 86 FPS | 254 FPS |
| high | 74 FPS | 208 FPS |
| ultra | 64 FPS | 170 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 60 FPS | 170 FPS |
| medium | 47 FPS | 133 FPS |
| high | 36 FPS | 123 FPS |
| ultra | 29 FPS | 102 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 750 Ti and GeForce GTX 1060

GeForce GTX 750 Ti
GeForce GTX 750 Ti
The GeForce GTX 750 Ti is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 18 2014. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1020 MHz to 1085 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,900 points. Launch price was $149.

GeForce GTX 1060
GeForce GTX 1060
The GeForce GTX 1060 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 27 2016. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1607 MHz to 1733 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 180W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 10,064 points. Launch price was $599.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 750 Ti scores 3,900 versus the GeForce GTX 1060's 10,064 — the GeForce GTX 1060 leads by 158.1%. The GeForce GTX 750 Ti is built on Maxwell while the GeForce GTX 1060 uses Pascal, both on 28 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 640 (GeForce GTX 750 Ti) vs 2,560 (GeForce GTX 1060). Raw compute: 1.389 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 750 Ti) vs 8.873 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1060). Boost clocks: 1085 MHz vs 1733 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,900 | 10,064+158% |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Pascal |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 16 nm |
| Shading Units | 640 | 2560+300% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.389 TFLOPS | 8.873 TFLOPS+539% |
| Boost Clock | 1085 MHz | 1733 MHz+60% |
| ROPs | 16 | 64+300% |
| TMUs | 40 | 160+300% |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB | 960 KB+200% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | Upscaling support |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 750 Ti comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1060 has 6 GB. The GeForce GTX 1060 offers 50% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 86.4 GB/s (GeForce GTX 750 Ti) vs 192 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1060) — a 122.2% advantage for the GeForce GTX 1060. Bus width: 128-bit vs 192-bit.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 6 GB+50% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 86.4 GB/s | 192 GB/s+122% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 192-bit+50% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (GeForce GTX 750 Ti) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1060). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.3+8% |
| OpenGL | 4.6+2% | 4.5 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 4+33% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 1st Gen (GeForce GTX 750 Ti) vs NVENC (Pascal) (GeForce GTX 1060). Decoder: PureVideo HD vs NVDEC (Pascal). Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (GeForce GTX 750 Ti) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC (GeForce GTX 1060).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 1st Gen | NVENC (Pascal) |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD | NVDEC (Pascal) |
| Codecs | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 | H.264,H.265/HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 750 Ti draws 75W versus the GeForce GTX 1060's 180W — a 82.4% difference. The GeForce GTX 750 Ti is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 750 Ti) vs 400W (GeForce GTX 1060). Power connectors: None vs 6-pin. Card length: 145mm vs 173mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-58% | 180W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-25% | 400W |
| Power Connector | None | 6-pin |
| Length | 145mm | 173mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 65 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 52.0 | 55.9+7% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 750 Ti launched at $149 MSRP, while the GeForce GTX 1060 launched at $249. The GeForce GTX 750 Ti costs 40.2% less ($100 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 26.2 (GeForce GTX 750 Ti) vs 40.4 (GeForce GTX 1060) — the GeForce GTX 1060 offers 54.2% better value. The GeForce GTX 1060 is the newer GPU (2016 vs 2014).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | GeForce GTX 1060 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-40% | $249 |
| Performance per Dollar | 26.2 | 40.4+54% |
| Codename | GM107 | GP104 |
| Release | February 18 2014 | May 27 2016 |
| Ranking | #501 | #137 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












