
GeForce GTX 750 Ti
Popular choices:

Radeon HD 7850
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 $249 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 67.2% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 26.2 vs 15.7 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $249 MSRP).
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 2 GB).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 130W, a 55W reduction.
- ✅Measures 145mm instead of 210mm, a 65mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2014-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
Radeon HD 7850
2012Why buy it
- ✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2012-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌67.1% HIGHER MSRP$249 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 15.7 vs 26.2 G3D/$ ($249 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ❌73.3% higher power demand at 130W vs 75W.
GeForce GTX 750 Ti
2014Radeon HD 7850
2012Why buy it
- ✅Costs $100 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $249 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 67.2% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 26.2 vs 15.7 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $249 MSRP).
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 2 GB).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 130W, a 55W reduction.
- ✅Measures 145mm instead of 210mm, a 65mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Why buy it
- ✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.
Trade-offs
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2014-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2012-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌67.1% HIGHER MSRP$249 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 15.7 vs 26.2 G3D/$ ($249 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ❌73.3% higher power demand at 130W vs 75W.
Quick Answers
So, is GeForce GTX 750 Ti better than Radeon HD 7850?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
Is Radeon HD 7850 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 | Radeon HD 7850 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 33 FPS | 77 FPS |
| medium | 21 FPS | 62 FPS |
| high | 13 FPS | 49 FPS |
| ultra | 6 FPS | 32 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 16 FPS | 65 FPS |
| medium | 9 FPS | 53 FPS |
| high | 4 FPS | 36 FPS |
| ultra | 2 FPS | 23 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 5 FPS | 23 FPS |
| medium | 3 FPS | 22 FPS |
| high | 2 FPS | 14 FPS |
| ultra | 1 FPS | 12 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | Radeon HD 7850 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 80 FPS | 113 FPS |
| medium | 49 FPS | 83 FPS |
| high | 36 FPS | 63 FPS |
| ultra | 21 FPS | 38 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 37 FPS | 63 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 43 FPS |
| high | 17 FPS | 31 FPS |
| ultra | 11 FPS | 20 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 12 FPS | 23 FPS |
| medium | 9 FPS | 15 FPS |
| high | 8 FPS | 12 FPS |
| ultra | 5 FPS | 8 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | Radeon HD 7850 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 176 FPS | 175 FPS |
| medium | 140 FPS | 140 FPS |
| high | 117 FPS | 117 FPS |
| ultra | 88 FPS | 88 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 132 FPS | 132 FPS |
| medium | 105 FPS | 105 FPS |
| high | 88 FPS | 88 FPS |
| ultra | 66 FPS | 66 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 88 FPS | 88 FPS |
| medium | 70 FPS | 70 FPS |
| high | 58 FPS | 58 FPS |
| ultra | 44 FPS | 44 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | Radeon HD 7850 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 163 FPS | 133 FPS |
| medium | 132 FPS | 105 FPS |
| high | 117 FPS | 88 FPS |
| ultra | 88 FPS | 73 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 114 FPS | 97 FPS |
| medium | 96 FPS | 78 FPS |
| high | 86 FPS | 67 FPS |
| ultra | 66 FPS | 51 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 67 FPS | 58 FPS |
| medium | 54 FPS | 44 FPS |
| high | 44 FPS | 34 FPS |
| ultra | 34 FPS | 24 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 750 Ti and Radeon HD 7850

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.

Radeon HD 7850
Radeon HD 7850
The Radeon HD 7850 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 5 2012. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1000 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 130W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,897 points. Launch price was $249.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 750 Ti scores 3,900 and the Radeon HD 7850 reaches 3,897 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 750 Ti is built on Maxwell while the Radeon HD 7850 uses GCN 1.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 640 (GeForce GTX 750 Ti) vs 1,024 (Radeon HD 7850). Raw compute: 1.389 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 750 Ti) vs 1.761 TFLOPS (Radeon HD 7850). Boost clocks: 1085 MHz vs 1000 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | Radeon HD 7850 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,900 | 3,897 |
| Architecture | Maxwell | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 640 | 1024+60% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.389 TFLOPS | 1.761 TFLOPS+27% |
| Boost Clock | 1085 MHz+9% | 1000 MHz |
| ROPs | 16 | 32+100% |
| TMUs | 40 | 64+60% |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB+25% | 256 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+300% | 0.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
The GeForce GTX 750 Ti gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Radeon HD 7850 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | Radeon HD 7850 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 750 Ti comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon HD 7850 has 2 GB. The GeForce GTX 750 Ti offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 86.4 GB/s (GeForce GTX 750 Ti) vs 153.6 GB/s (Radeon HD 7850) — a 77.8% advantage for the Radeon HD 7850. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GeForce GTX 750 Ti) vs 0.5 MB (Radeon HD 7850) — the GeForce GTX 750 Ti has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | Radeon HD 7850 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+100% | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 86.4 GB/s | 153.6 GB/s+78% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 256-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+300% | 0.5 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (GeForce GTX 750 Ti) vs 12 (Radeon HD 7850). Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | Radeon HD 7850 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 4+33% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 1st Gen (GeForce GTX 750 Ti) vs VCE 1.0 (Radeon HD 7850). Decoder: PureVideo HD vs UVD 3.1. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (GeForce GTX 750 Ti) vs H.264 (Radeon HD 7850).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | Radeon HD 7850 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 1st Gen | VCE 1.0 |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD | UVD 3.1 |
| Codecs | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 | H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 750 Ti draws 75W versus the Radeon HD 7850's 130W — a 53.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 750 Ti is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 750 Ti) vs 500W (Radeon HD 7850). Power connectors: None vs 1x 6-pin. Card length: 145mm vs 210mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | Radeon HD 7850 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-42% | 130W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-40% | 500W |
| Power Connector | None | 1x 6-pin |
| Length | 145mm | 210mm |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 65 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 52.0+73% | 30.0 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 750 Ti launched at $149 MSRP, while the Radeon HD 7850 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 15.7 (Radeon HD 7850) — the GeForce GTX 750 Ti offers 66.9% better value. The GeForce GTX 750 Ti is the newer GPU (2014 vs 2012).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | Radeon HD 7850 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-40% | $249 |
| Performance per Dollar | 26.2+67% | 15.7 |
| Codename | GM107 | Pitcairn |
| Release | February 18 2014 | March 5 2012 |
| Ranking | #501 | #503 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












