Tuesday, February 10th 2015

ASUS Announces GeForce GTX 750 Ti Strix 4GB

In a bid to woo those who choose graphics cards by memory amounts (and cars with engine-displacement), ASUS rolled out a 4 GB variant of its GeForce GTX 750 Ti Strix lower mid-range graphics card. Pictured below, the card is built identical to the standard 2 GB model, but with double the GDDR5 memory amount. It features out of the box clock speeds of 1124 MHz core, 1202 MHz GPU Boost, and 5.40 GHz (GDDR5-effective) memory. Based on the 28 nm GM107 silicon, the GTX 750 Ti features 640 CUDA cores based on the "Maxwell" architecture, and a 128-bit wide GDDR5 memory interface. ASUS didn't disclose pricing.
Add your own comment

50 Comments on ASUS Announces GeForce GTX 750 Ti Strix 4GB

#1
jabbadap
Ehh, what is the point of this card. Gtx 750 ti does not support sli, and I don't think vram is this cards biggest bottleneck...
Posted on Reply
#2
64K
jabbadap said:
Ehh, what is the point of this card. Gtx 750 ti does not support sli, and I don't think vram is this cards biggest bottleneck...
Yeah, not everyone is as educated about hardware as people who frequent tech sites. Probably a lot of people will see this as a faster 750Ti because it has double the VRAM.
Posted on Reply
#3
xfia
load a 750ti with 4gb but you cant get a 760x2 with 4gb affective :shadedshu:
Posted on Reply
#4
rtwjunkie
PC Gaming Enthusiast
Does this even have the processing power to use 4gig of VRAM? About all it would be good for would be FNV or Skyrim with lots of texture mods.
Posted on Reply
#5
xfia
I don't think it has the balls to heavily mod skyrim like that
Posted on Reply
#6
rruff
It's for selling! Makes zero practical sense, but they can sell them to people that don't know the difference. The 750 Ti doesn't even need 2GB.

I've seen lower end Nvidia cards with 4GB (like GT 640s for instance), but don't recall any AMD cards being that silly.
Posted on Reply
#7
GhostRyder
I don't see this making almost any sense, I cannot really fathom a situation where a card at this performance point would need the extra 2gb of VRAM or even be able to use it properly. If this card supported SLI then maybe I could say its for people running two cards, otherwise though the situations where more VRAM would be needed its not going to exceed.
Posted on Reply
#8
hojnikb
Its just a card for chasing fools, nothing else.

Just like 640GT 4GB
Posted on Reply
#9
Casecutter
Perhaps they granularly drop one of the L2, so it has access to 3.5Gb... ;)
Posted on Reply
#11
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
hojnikb said:
Its just a card for chasing fools, nothing else.

Just like 640GT 4GB
GT 610 2GB... Or MX440 512MB.. Old habits.
Posted on Reply
#12
64K
xfia said:
:twitch: they would never.. nvidia are as honest as nuns besides they clearly have been working on more than color compression.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sapphire-vapor-x-r9-290x-8gb,3977.html

the test is meant to test vram though you cant tell there is gimping going on
It's no surprise to see the 290X pulling out in the lead at 4K but I'm not sure that the reviewer summed it up correctly.



His last page is titled "4K Gains and 1080 Parity". I see the 5% gain at 4K over the 970 but how is the 13% gain by the 970 over the 290X 8 GB parity?
Posted on Reply
#13
thebluebumblebee
btarunr said:
(and cars with engine-displacement)
No, it's like putting the tires from the Camaro Z-28 on a Prius.
Posted on Reply
#14
xfia
64K said:
It's no surprise to see the 290X pulling out in the lead at 4K but I'm not sure that the reviewer summed it up correctly.



His last page is titled "4K Gains and 1080 Parity". I see the 5% gain at 4K over the 970 but how is the 13% gain by the 970 over the 290X 8 GB parity?
maybe parity with thief throwing off the average or just how good all 3 do at 1080p. I did not really understand the test and why no sli/crossfire when I read it months ago so I dismissed it but I found it yesterday and it says a bit more to me.
Posted on Reply
#15
xorbe
The slower the card, the more likely it'll have big ram ... they make 8GB lower-end oem cards from time to time.

In other news, a 4GB 750Ti has more usable memory than a 970 ... :roll:

The 750Ti is like 50W average, and the 960 about 110W average. They need a 950 around 75W average.
Posted on Reply
#16
xfia
I see a 1080p parity especially for 60hz.. I mean if you got 780(ti)290(x)98(7)0 your not really going to be telling the difference without a benchmark and even a 770 or 280x is going to hit home most of the time.
apparently 660's and possibly even titans have similar memory systems so if its true of course there is no specific update for the 970 when it is business as usual. that would also mean microsoft has been approving the way the driver handles it for some time. doesn't really mean microsoft knew but it means the driver gets the job done. most of the time anyway and that's what they do though.. figure out when the driver could do a better job and fix it.
that's what it has boiled down to for me and of course opinion so feel enlightened or hate.. whatever
meanwhile things are looking up for amd share holders.
Posted on Reply
#17
techy1
you know what would be better card for upgrade VRAM to 4GB ... a GTX 970 ;)
Posted on Reply
#18
ayazam
what for :confused:,
why they dont make another mars(960) with true 4GB vram... that would be nice
Posted on Reply
#19
xorbe
ayazam said:
what for :confused:,
why they dont make another mars(960) with true 4GB vram... that would be nice
That's crazy talk, all that cost for a single-card SLI setup using 128-bit chips? Just get a single 980 which will never have any SLI problems.
Posted on Reply
#20
xkche
techy1 said:
you know what would be better card for upgrade VRAM to 4GB ... a GTX 970 ;)
Jajajaja
Posted on Reply
#21
Fluffmeister
Nice card, being Maxwell it's DX12 performance should give it some longevity too.
Posted on Reply
#22
Xzibit
Casecutter said:
Perhaps they granularly drop one of the L2, so it has access to 3.5Gb... ;)
techy1 said:
you know what would be better card for upgrade VRAM to 4GB ... a GTX 970 ;)
Now that's funny..
Posted on Reply
#23
xfia
Fluffmeister said:
Nice card, being Maxwell it's DX12 performance should give it some longevity too.
what is the ram going to put the price up to? near the price of a 960? surely a amd gpu with more horsepower could be had and its not like having a full dx12 gpu is going to matter for a long ass time.
guess someone has to look blindly and try keep nv rep up since they don't seem to be to worried about it that much.
Posted on Reply
#24
Xzibit
There is also another issue that might present itself with DX12 and Nvidia cards

Toms Hardware
Note that the GeForce GTX 980's stress test power consumption is actually a few watts lower than the gaming result. This is likely due to throttling that kicks in when we hit the thermal ceiling.
TechPowerUp
Temperatures are good, but they are capped by NVIDIA's Boost 2.0 algorithm which is set to a 80°C temperature limit. Clocks will be reduced slightly if the card gets any hotter than that, although they will never drop below the base clock. Our graph further down on the page details this card's clock distribution.
Reference models are reaching 80C-81C in open bench test. DX12 is suppose to keep the GPU feed more consistently with information and will have less time for GPU Boost to down clock it in games leading to higher voltage/temps and possibly throttling.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment