FireStream 9270 vs GeForce GT 750M

CPU

GPU

FireStream 9270

2008Core: 750 MHz

GeForce GT 750M

2013Core: 941 MHzBoost: 967 MHz

Performance Spectrum - GPU

FireStream 9270

160

1,341

+0.7%

Radeon R7 A10-7800

Radeon Vega 3

Radeon HD 8570D + HD 8570 Dual

1,332

0.0%

GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Mobile)

GeForce RTX 2060 (móvel)

RTX 2000 Ada Generation Embedded GPU

GeForce RTX 5070 Laptop 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.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The FireStream 9270 is positioned at rank 359 and the GeForce GT 750M is on rank 158, so the GeForce GT 750M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar FireStream 9270

#344

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

16599%

#359

FireStream 9270

MSRP: $1499|Avg: $20

100%

#360

Quadro 400

MSRP: $169|Avg: $500

99%

#361

FirePro 2260

MSRP: $129|Avg: $15

99%

#362

Quadro FX 380 LP

MSRP: $169|Avg: $15

97%

#364

Quadro FX 1800

MSRP: $489|Avg: $100

91%

#365

FirePro 3D V8700

MSRP: $1499|Avg: $1229

90%

#366

FirePro 3D V9800

MSRP: $3499|Avg: $80

90%

#367

Quadro 5000

MSRP: $2499|Avg: $100

89%

#368

FirePro V5700

MSRP: $599|Avg: $20

88%

#369

FirePro V9800

MSRP: $3499|Avg: $250

88%

#370

FirePro 3D V8750

MSRP: $1799|Avg: $500

80%

#371

FirePro 3D V7750

MSRP: $799|Avg: $20

76%

#372

GRID M10-2B

MSRP: $2500|Avg: $80

74%

#373

Quadro FX 370

MSRP: $129|Avg: $500

73%

#374

Quadro 6000

MSRP: $4399|Avg: $150

69%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce GT 750M

#42

Radeon RX 6600S

MSRP: $400|Avg: $400

98%

#43

Radeon RX 8060S

MSRP: $500|Avg: $500

96%

#148

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

326%

#150

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

296%

#151

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

295%

#155

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

268%

#156

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

266%

#158

GeForce GT 750M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

100%

#159

GeForce GT 425M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $25

100%

#172

GeForce GT 540M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $30

95%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The FireStream 9270 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.7% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GT 750M.

Insight	FireStream 9270	GeForce GT 750M
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+0.7%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.7%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / TeraScale (2005−2013))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	—

💎 Value Proposition

The FireStream 9270 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the FireStream 9270 holds the technical lead. Priced at $20 (vs $50), it costs 60% less, resulting in a 151.7% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	FireStream 9270	GeForce GT 750M
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+151.7%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($20)	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($50)

Performance Check

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 7800X3D 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.

FireStream 9270 Benchmark Check

GeForce GT 750M Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

No prediction data available

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

No prediction data available

League of Legends

League of Legends

No prediction data available

Valorant

Valorant

No prediction data available

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of FireStream 9270 and GeForce GT 750M

FireStream 9270

The FireStream 9270 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 13 2008. It features the TeraScale architecture. The core clock speed is 750 MHz. It has 800 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 160W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,341 points.

GeForce GT 750M

The GeForce GT 750M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 9 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 941 MHz to 967 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,332 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The FireStream 9270 scores 1,341 and the GeForce GT 750M reaches 1,332 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FireStream 9270 is built on TeraScale while the GeForce GT 750M uses Kepler, both on 55 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 800 (FireStream 9270) vs 384 (GeForce GT 750M). Raw compute: 1.2 TFLOPS (FireStream 9270) vs 0.7427 TFLOPS (GeForce GT 750M).

Feature	FireStream 9270	GeForce GT 750M
G3D Mark Score	1,341	1,332
Architecture	TeraScale	Kepler
Process Node	55 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	800+108%	384
Compute (TFLOPS)	1.2 TFLOPS+62%	0.7427 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	40+25%	32
L1 Cache	160 KB+400%	32 KB
L2 Cache	256 KB	256 KB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	FireStream 9270	GeForce GT 750M
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards feature 2 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.

Feature	FireStream 9270	GeForce GT 750M
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	2 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	64-bit
L2 Cache	256 KB	256 KB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 10.1 (FireStream 9270) vs 12 (FL11) (GeForce GT 750M). OpenGL: 3.3 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 1 vs 4.

Feature	FireStream 9270	GeForce GT 750M
DirectX	10.1	12 (FL11)+19%
OpenGL	3.3	4.6+39%
Max Displays	1	4+300%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: None (FireStream 9270) vs NVENC 1st gen (GeForce GT 750M). Decoder: UVD 2.2 vs NVDEC 1st gen. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (FireStream 9270) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GT 750M).

Feature	FireStream 9270	GeForce GT 750M
Encoder	None	NVENC 1st gen
Decoder	UVD 2.2	NVDEC 1st gen
Codecs	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The FireStream 9270 draws 160W versus the GeForce GT 750M's 50W — a 104.8% difference. The GeForce GT 750M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FireStream 9270) vs 350W (GeForce GT 750M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 241mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 80°C.

Feature	FireStream 9270	GeForce GT 750M
TDP	160W	50W-69%
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	PCIe-powered
Length	241mm	0mm
Height	111mm	0mm
Slots	2	0-100%
Temp (Load)	85°C	80°C-6%
Perf/Watt	8.4	26.6+217%

💰

Value Analysis

The FireStream 9270 costs 60% less ($30 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 67.0 (FireStream 9270) vs 26.6 (GeForce GT 750M) — the FireStream 9270 offers 151.9% better value. The GeForce GT 750M is the newer GPU (2013 vs 2008).