NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER vs NVIDIA Quadro K420
Vergleichende Analyse von NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER und NVIDIA Quadro K420 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 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 5 Jahr(e) 4 Monat(e) später
- Etwa 75% höhere Kerntaktfrequenz:1530 MHz vs 876 MHz
- 9843.1x mehr Texturfüllrate: 138.0 GTexel/s vs 14.02 GTexel / s
- 6.7x mehr Leitungssysteme: 1280 vs 192
- Ein neuerer Herstellungsprozess ermöglicht eine leistungsfähigere, aber dennoch kühlere Grafikkarte: 12 nm vs 28 nm
- 4096x mehr maximale Speichergröße: 4 GB vs 1 GB / 2 GB
- 13.9x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 10180 vs 733
- 2.6x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 751 vs 288
- 30.3x bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 55838 vs 1843
- 29.7x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 178.014 vs 6
- 10.5x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1961.932 vs 186.605
- 25.8x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 11.169 vs 0.433
- 10.5x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 109.29 vs 10.365
- 44.3x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 787.025 vs 17.75
- 10.9x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 13569 vs 1245
- 6.2x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3715 vs 598
- 2.7x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3357 vs 1241
- 10.9x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 13569 vs 1245
- 6.2x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3715 vs 598
- 2.7x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3357 vs 1241
| Spezifikationen | |
| Startdatum | 22 Nov 2019 vs 22 July 2014 |
| Kerntaktfrequenz | 1530 MHz vs 876 MHz |
| Texturfüllrate | 138.0 GTexel/s vs 14.02 GTexel / s |
| Leitungssysteme | 1280 vs 192 |
| Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 12 nm vs 28 nm |
| Maximale Speichergröße | 4 GB vs 1 GB / 2 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 10180 vs 733 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 751 vs 288 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 55838 vs 1843 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 178.014 vs 6 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1961.932 vs 186.605 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 11.169 vs 0.433 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 109.29 vs 10.365 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 787.025 vs 17.75 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 13569 vs 1245 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 vs 598 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 vs 1241 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 13569 vs 1245 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 vs 598 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 vs 1241 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der NVIDIA Quadro K420
- 2.4x geringere typische Leistungsaufnahme: 41 Watt vs 100 Watt
| Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 41 Watt vs 100 Watt |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K420
| 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) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER | NVIDIA Quadro K420 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 10180 | 733 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 751 | 288 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 55838 | 1843 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 178.014 | 6 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1961.932 | 186.605 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 11.169 | 0.433 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 109.29 | 10.365 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 787.025 | 17.75 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 13569 | 1245 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 | 598 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 | 1241 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 13569 | 1245 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 | 598 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 | 1241 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 352 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER | NVIDIA Quadro K420 | |
|---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
| Architektur | Turing | Kepler |
| Codename | TU116 | GK107 |
| Startdatum | 22 Nov 2019 | 22 July 2014 |
| Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 283 | 1467 |
| Typ | Desktop | Workstation |
| Einführungspreis (MSRP) | $96.67 | |
| Jetzt kaufen | $89.99 | |
| Preis-Leistungs-Verhältnis (0-100) | 10.27 | |
Technische Info |
||
| Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1725 MHz | |
| Kerntaktfrequenz | 1530 MHz | 876 MHz |
| Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 138.0 GFLOPS (1:32) | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 8.832 TFLOPS (2:1) | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 4.416 TFLOPS | |
| Leitungssysteme | 1280 | 192 |
| Pixel fill rate | 55.20 GPixel/s | |
| Texturfüllrate | 138.0 GTexel/s | 14.02 GTexel / s |
| Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 100 Watt | 41 Watt |
| Anzahl der Transistoren | 6600 million | 1,270 million |
| Gleitkomma-Leistung | 336.4 gflops | |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
| Display-Anschlüsse | 1xDVI, 1xHDMI, 1xDisplayPort | DVI-I DP, 1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort |
| DisplayPort-Unterstützung | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Anzahl der gleichzeitigen Anzeigen | 4 | |
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
| Schnittstelle | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Länge | 9 inches (229 mm) | 160 mm |
| Empfohlene Systemleistung (PSU) | 350 Watt | |
| Zusätzliche Leistungssteckverbinder | 1x 6-pin | None |
| Breite | Dual-slot | 1" (2.5 cm) |
API-Unterstützung |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 5 |
| Vulkan | ||
Speicher |
||
| Maximale RAM-Belastung | 4 GB | 1 GB / 2 GB |
| Speicherbandbreite | 192 GB/s | |
| Breite des Speicherbusses | 128 bit | 128 Bit |
| Speichertyp | GDDR6 | 128 Bit |
| Speichertaktfrequenz | 1782 MHz | |
Technologien |
||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView Desktop Management | ||
Navigation
Einen Grafikprozessor auswählen
Grafikkarten vergleichen
Vergleiche NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER mit anderen
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 SUPER vs
ATIFirePro RG220
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 SUPER vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 485M
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 SUPER vs
AMDRadeon R9 290X
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 SUPER vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1080 (Desktop)
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 SUPER vs
AMDRadeon RX 590
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 SUPER vs
AMDRadeon Pro 5600M
