✨ We've just launched our NEW website design!

Learn More Here
Graphics Cards

Nvidia GTX 750 Ti 2GB “Maxwell” Graphics Card Review

The Technical Details – Maxwell and GM107


Maxwell uses a very different design to Kepler because it is able to achieve 2X performance per watt and 35% more performance per CUDA core compared to Kepler. We also know that this extra performance has to have come from architectural improvements because both Maxwell (at this stage) and Kepler use the 28nm process, so there are no gains from transistor shrinkage.

Maxwell_Kepler

Some of the advances the Maxwell design bring include:

  • improvements to control logic partitioning
  • better workload balancing
  • improved clock-gating granularity
  • improved compiler-based scheduling
  • increased number of instructions issued per clock cycle

The new Maxwell design enables Nvidia to put five SM(M)s into the GM107 which compares to just two SM(X)s in the GK107, that 2.5X increase occurs with just a 25% increase in die area. Another significant improvement is the much larger L2 cache (2048kb in GM107 instead of 256kb in GK107) that allows the graphics card to access the VRAM less frequently resulting in less power consumption and improved performance.

In addition to improving the memory system Nvidia have also improved the integrated H.264 encoder that we first saw on the Kepler GPU. As we know the H.264 encoder allows for Nvidia’s ShadowPlay technology to work, see our review of that here, but it also allows for more effective video playback with reduced power consumption. Maxwell has the capability to provide faster encode and decode thanks to a revised NVENC block; 6-8X real time encode is provided on Maxwell versus 4X on Kepler. There is also 8-10X faster decode due to the addition of new local decoder cache and higher memory efficiency per stream. Finally Maxwell has a GC5 power state specifically designed for light workload cases like video playback. GC5, which some might understand by likening to Intel’s Haswell C6 and C7 states, is a special low power sleep state that provides power savings over older Nvidia GPUs in similar light workload scenarios.

GeForce_GTX_750_Ti_Block_Diagram_FINAL

A more detailed explanation of the technicalities in Maxwell is shown below courtesy of Nvidia’s whitepaper:

“From a graphics features perspective, our first-generation Maxwell GPUs offer the same API functionality as Kepler GPUs. At the high level, Maxwell also implements multiple SM units within a GPC (Graphics Processing Cluster), and each SM includes a Polymorph Engine and Texture Units, while each GPC includes a Raster Engine. ROPs are still aligned with L2 cache slices and Memory Controllers. Internally, all the units and crossbar structures have been redesigned, data flows optimized, power management significantly improved, and so on.
The GM107 GPU contains one GPC, five Maxwell Streaming Multiprocessors (SMM), and two 64-bit memory controllers (128-bit total). This is the full implementation of the chip, and is the same configuration we ship with the GeForce GTX 750 Ti.

The primary contributor to Maxwell’s improved efficiency is the new Maxwell SM architecture, SMM. This new SM architecture achieves much higher power efficiency and delivers 35% more performance per CUDA Core on shader-limited workloads. Achieving these results required a number of major changes to the architecture. The SM scheduler architecture and algorithms have been rewritten to be more intelligent and avoid unnecessary stalls, while further reducing the energy per instruction required for scheduling.
The organization of the SM has also changed. Each SM is now partitioned into four separate processing blocks, each with its own instruction buffer, scheduler and 32 CUDA cores. The Kepler approach of having a non-power-of-two number of CUDA cores, with some that are shared, has been eliminated. This partitioning simplifies the design and scheduling logic, saving area and power, and reduces computation latency.
Pairs of processing blocks share four texture filtering units and a texture cache. The compute L1 cache function has now also been combined with the texture cache function, and shared memory is a separate unit (similar to the approach used on G80, the first CUDA capable GPU), that is shared across all four blocks. Overall, with this new design, each “SM” is significantly smaller while delivering about 90% of the performance of a Kepler SM, and the smaller area enables us to implement many more SMs per GPU. Comparing GK107 versus GM107 total SM related metrics, GM107 has five versus two SMs, 25% more peak texture performance, 1.7 times more CUDA cores, and about 2.3 times more delivered shader performance.”

GeForce_GTX_750_Ti_SM_Diagram_FINAL

Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20Next page

Related Articles

8 Comments

  1. nice card but going from a 650 ti to a 750 ti dont really seem like much of an upgrade for me to pay out $150 i would get a 650 ti boost over this card 😛

    if only when the 860 comes out it could be like only $200 but yes i know it wont be 😛

    1. Yeh it’s not meant to be much of an upgrade for GTX 650 Ti Boost users, it is more aimed at people with GTX 5XX series cards or those building new small form factor/low power PCs

    2. It’s about 15-20% quicker than the 650Ti while consuming less power at typically common screen resolutions. If you’re in the market for either card the smart money would be on the 750Ti.

  2. This is weird! If the 750Ti is faster than the 650Ti, Then how did Nvidia do it? Because both cards memory is the same speed at 86.4 gb/s , Next the 650Ti has 64 TMU’s giving a speed of 59392 Mtexels/sec
    vs the 750Ti’s 40 TMUs Giving a speed of 40800 Mtexels/sec, Both cards have 16 ROP’s, Next the 650Ti has 768 cuda cores vs the 750Ti’s 640 cuda cores. So if it is faster I am not seeing how. I saw the benchmarks. Did they use older bench scores vs the recent 750Ti bench scores? If I am not mistaken the 650Ti improved in performance with later driver updates. Something about a V-Sync issue with the older drivers. I think other 600 series cards also had the same issue until the driver update.

    If the 750Ti is faster I will buy it, Because I am going to eventually need to get a card with at’least 2GB in the future. And I want a card close in performance and price to what I got, I just hope they are properly comparing them.

    1. Nvidia GPU Cores are not comparable across generations, Nvidia’s GTX 750 Ti is Maxwell while the GTX 650 Ti is Kepler. To use an AMD example You wouldn’t say the HD 6670 that has 480 (VLIW5) cores so why is not faster than the HD 7730/R7 240 which ONLY has 384 (GCN) cores. So why do the same thing with the Nvidia cards here. The GTX 750 Ti is SIGNIFICANTLY faster than the GTX 650 Ti, there is absolutely no disputing that in any way. Any drivers will give you the same results – the GTX 750 TI is at least 10% faster. The GTX 650 Ti BOOST on the other hand is faster than the GTX 750 Ti. So please ensure you do not confuse the two.

      Oh and if you need verification from another site please see below:

      http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_750_Ti/25.html

      1. I know the difference between the 650 Ti boost and Non Boost 650 Ti, (I do own a non boost after all) However I did finally come to a conclusion, The 750 Ti is slightly faster but not enough to make any difference at all from a regular NON BOOST (so you can read) 650 Ti, Also both cards only have a memory bandwidth of 86.4 GB/sec meaning neither can really utilize 2GB , They can however utilize a little over 1GB but the difference is not enough to matter much. Looks like if anyone wants a cheap upgrade this year from the 650 Ti 1GB they will have to go with the R7 265, It has 2GB @ 179.2 GB/sec that’s enough bandwidth to utilize all 2GB. It stinks having to go to a AMD card because the crap drivers, But for $149 it is the same price as the 750Ti and a much more logical choice.

        1. The R7 265 is a good option but currently it isn’t really available to buy at many places, and in the UK at least it is selling from £125+. The GTX 750 Ti starts at £106. I’d rather pay £106 for a 750 ti than £125 for an R7 265 when the difference in performance is so small.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button
Close

Adblock Detected

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker!   eTeknix prides itself on supplying the most accurate and informative PC and tech related news and reviews and this is made possible by advertisements but be rest assured that we will never serve pop ups, self playing audio ads or any form of ad that tracks your information as your data security is as important to us as it is to you.   If you want to help support us further you can over on our Patreon!   Thank you for visiting eTeknix