NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070
Vergleichende Analyse von NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti und NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Videokarten für alle bekannten Merkmale in den folgenden Kategorien: Essenzielles, Technische Info, Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse, Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen, API-Unterstützung, Speicher. 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 RTX 3050 Ti
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 8 Monat(e) später
- 2.9x geringere typische Leistungsaufnahme: 75 Watt vs 220 Watt
Startdatum | 11 May 2021 vs 1 Sep 2020 |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 75 Watt vs 220 Watt |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070
- 2x mehr Kerntaktfrequenz: 1500 MHz vs 735 MHz
- Etwa 67% höhere Boost-Taktfrequenz: 1725 MHz vs 1035 MHz
- 3.8x mehr Texturfüllrate: 317.4 GTexel/s vs 82.80 GTexel/s
- 2.3x mehr Leitungssysteme: 5888 vs 2560
- 2x mehr maximale Speichergröße: 8 GB vs 4 GB
- Etwa 17% höhere Speichertaktfrequenz: 1750 MHz, 14 Gbps effective vs 1500 MHz, 12 Gbps effective
- 2.2x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 22253 vs 10117
- 2x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 999 vs 497
- 2.1x bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 123479 vs 57885
- Etwa 98% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 453.922 vs 229.393
- 2.8x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 5803.174 vs 2082.931
- 2.5x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 40.757 vs 16.561
- Etwa 35% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 182.055 vs 134.68
- 2.8x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 1664.554 vs 599.217
- Etwa 97% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 31716 vs 16098
- 3.6x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 13566 vs 3717
- 9.5x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 31930 vs 3358
- Etwa 97% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 31716 vs 16098
- 3.6x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 13566 vs 3717
- 9.5x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 31930 vs 3358
- 6.7x bessere Leistung in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3163 vs 469
Spezifikationen | |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 1500 MHz vs 735 MHz |
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1725 MHz vs 1035 MHz |
Texturfüllrate | 317.4 GTexel/s vs 82.80 GTexel/s |
Leitungssysteme | 5888 vs 2560 |
Maximale Speichergröße | 8 GB vs 4 GB |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 1750 MHz, 14 Gbps effective vs 1500 MHz, 12 Gbps effective |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 22253 vs 10117 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 999 vs 497 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 123479 vs 57885 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 453.922 vs 229.393 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 5803.174 vs 2082.931 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 40.757 vs 16.561 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 182.055 vs 134.68 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1664.554 vs 599.217 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 31716 vs 16098 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 13566 vs 3717 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 31930 vs 3358 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 31716 vs 16098 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 13566 vs 3717 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 31930 vs 3358 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3163 vs 469 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070
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 | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 10117 | 22253 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 497 | 999 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 57885 | 123479 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 229.393 | 453.922 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2082.931 | 5803.174 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 16.561 | 40.757 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 134.68 | 182.055 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 599.217 | 1664.554 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 16098 | 31716 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3717 | 13566 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 31930 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 16098 | 31716 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3717 | 13566 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 31930 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 469 | 3163 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 | |
---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
Architektur | Ampere | Ampere |
Codename | GA106 | GA104 |
Startdatum | 11 May 2021 | 1 Sep 2020 |
Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 276 | 44 |
Typ | Laptop | Desktop |
Einführungspreis (MSRP) | $499 | |
Technische Info |
||
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1035 MHz | 1725 MHz |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 735 MHz | 1500 MHz |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 8 nm | 8 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 82.80 GFLOPS (1:64) | 317.4 GFLOPS (1:64) |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 5.299 TFLOPS (1:1) | 20.31 TFLOPS (1:1) |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 5.299 TFLOPS | 20.31 TFLOPS |
Leitungssysteme | 2560 | 5888 |
Pixel fill rate | 49.68 GPixel/s | 165.6 GPixel/s |
Texturfüllrate | 82.80 GTexel/s | 317.4 GTexel/s |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 75 Watt | 220 Watt |
Anzahl der Transistoren | 12000 million | 17400 million |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
Display-Anschlüsse | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
Formfaktor | IGP | Dual-slot |
Schnittstelle | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
Zusätzliche Leistungssteckverbinder | None | 1x 12-pin |
Höhe | 112 mm (4.4 inches) | |
Länge | 242 mm, 9.5 inches | |
Empfohlene Systemleistung (PSU) | 550 Watt | |
Breite | 112 mm, 4.4 inches | |
API-Unterstützung |
||
DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
OpenCL | 3.0 | 3.0 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Shader Model | 6.7 | 6.7 |
Vulkan | ||
Speicher |
||
Maximale RAM-Belastung | 4 GB | 8 GB |
Speicherbandbreite | 192.0 GB/s | 448.0 GB/s |
Breite des Speicherbusses | 128 bit | 256 bit |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 1500 MHz, 12 Gbps effective | 1750 MHz, 14 Gbps effective |
Speichertyp | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |