AMD Radeon RX 550 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)
Vergleichende Analyse von AMD Radeon RX 550 und NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) Videokarten für alle bekannten Merkmale in den folgenden Kategorien: Essenzielles, Technische Info, Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse, Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen, API-Unterstützung, Speicher, Technologien. Benchmark-Videokarten Leistungsanalyse: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Unterschiede
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der AMD Radeon RX 550
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 5 Monat(e) später
- Etwa 50% geringere typische Leistungsaufnahme: 50 Watt vs 75 Watt
- 1000x mehr Speichertaktfrequenz: 7000 MHz vs 7 GB/s
- Etwa 23% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1037.305 vs 843.503
- 2.1x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 52.533 vs 24.676
Spezifikationen | |
Startdatum | 18 April 2017 vs 25 October 2016 |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 50 Watt vs 75 Watt |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 7000 MHz vs 7 GB/s |
Benchmarks | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1037.305 vs 843.503 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 52.533 vs 24.676 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)
- Etwa 27% höhere Kerntaktfrequenz:1392 MHz vs 1100 MHz
- Etwa 18% höhere Boost-Taktfrequenz: 1392 MHz vs 1183 MHz
- Etwa 76% höhere Texturfüllrate: 66.82 GTexel / s vs 37.86 GTexel / s
- Etwa 50% höhere Leitungssysteme: 768 vs 512
- 1781.7x bessere Gleitkomma-Leistung: 2,138 gflops vs 1.2 TFLOPs
- 2.4x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6332 vs 2690
- Etwa 37% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 650 vs 476
- Etwa 79% bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 20732 vs 11610
- 2.3x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 75.758 vs 33.507
- Etwa 66% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.071 vs 3.064
- 2.1x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 301.168 vs 140.911
- Etwa 89% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8496 vs 4485
- 3.9x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3687 vs 940
- Etwa 55% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3336 vs 2158
- Etwa 89% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8496 vs 4485
- 3.9x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3687 vs 940
- Etwa 55% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3336 vs 2158
- 2.4x bessere Leistung in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 305 vs 127
Spezifikationen | |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 1392 MHz vs 1100 MHz |
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1392 MHz vs 1183 MHz |
Texturfüllrate | 66.82 GTexel / s vs 37.86 GTexel / s |
Leitungssysteme | 768 vs 512 |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 2,138 gflops vs 1.2 TFLOPs |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 6332 vs 2690 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 650 vs 476 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 20732 vs 11610 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 75.758 vs 33.507 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.071 vs 3.064 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 301.168 vs 140.911 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8496 vs 4485 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3687 vs 940 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3336 vs 2158 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8496 vs 4485 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3687 vs 940 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3336 vs 2158 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 305 vs 127 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: AMD Radeon RX 550
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon RX 550 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2690 | 6332 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 476 | 650 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 11610 | 20732 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 33.507 | 75.758 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1037.305 | 843.503 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.064 | 5.071 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 52.533 | 24.676 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 140.911 | 301.168 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4485 | 8496 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 940 | 3687 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2158 | 3336 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4485 | 8496 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 940 | 3687 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2158 | 3336 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 127 | 305 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
AMD Radeon RX 550 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) | |
---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
Architektur | GCN 4.0 | Pascal |
Codename | Lexa | GP107 |
Design | Radeon RX 500 Series | |
GCN-Generierung | 4th Gen | |
Startdatum | 18 April 2017 | 25 October 2016 |
Einführungspreis (MSRP) | $79 | $139 |
Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 876 | 487 |
Jetzt kaufen | $75 | $159.99 |
Typ | Desktop | Desktop |
Preis-Leistungs-Verhältnis (0-100) | 59.51 | 46.07 |
Technische Info |
||
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1183 MHz | 1392 MHz |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 1100 MHz | 1392 MHz |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 1.2 TFLOPs | 2,138 gflops |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 14 nm | 14 nm |
Leitungssysteme | 512 | 768 |
Texturfüllrate | 37.86 GTexel / s | 66.82 GTexel / s |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 50 Watt | 75 Watt |
Anzahl der Transistoren | 2,200 million | 3,300 million |
CUDA-Kerne | 768 | |
Maximale GPU-Temperatur | 97 °C | |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
Display-Anschlüsse | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
DisplayPort-Unterstützung | ||
Dual-Link-DVI-Unterstützung | ||
HDMI | ||
VGA | ||
G-SYNC-Unterstützung | ||
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
Schnittstelle | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Länge | 145 mm | 145 mm |
Empfohlene Systemleistung (PSU) | 400 Watt | |
Zusätzliche Leistungssteckverbinder | None | None |
API-Unterstützung |
||
DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (12_1) |
OpenCL | 2.0 | |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Vulkan | ||
Speicher |
||
Maximale RAM-Belastung | 4 GB | 4 GB |
Speicherbandbreite | 112 GB/s | 112 GB / s |
Breite des Speicherbusses | 128 bit | 128 Bit |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 7000 MHz | 7 GB/s |
Speichertyp | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Gemeinsamer Speicher | 0 | |
Technologien |
||
4K H264 Decode | ||
4K H264 Encode | ||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
AMD Radeon™ Chill | ||
AMD Radeon™ ReLive | ||
AppAcceleration | ||
FreeSync | ||
H265/HEVC Decode | ||
H265/HEVC Encode | ||
HDMI 4K Support | ||
LiquidVR | ||
PowerTune | ||
TrueAudio | ||
Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
Virtual Super Resolution (VSR) | ||
3D Vision | ||
Ansel | ||
CUDA | ||
Multi Monitor | ||
Multi-Projection | ||
VR Ready |