NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) vs AMD Radeon R9 M270X
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) and AMD Radeon R9 M270X videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: 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.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 10 month(s) later
- Around 87% higher core clock speed: 1354 MHz vs 725 MHz
- Around 93% higher boost clock speed: 1493 MHz vs 775 MHz
- Around 24% higher texture fill rate: 59.72 GTexel / s vs 48 GTexel / s
- Around 24% better floating-point performance: 1,911 gflops vs 1,536 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 16 nm vs 28 nm
- 6.2x more memory clock speed: 7008 MHz vs 1125 MHz
- 3.7x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 4462 vs 1204
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 1 February 2017 vs 21 March 2014 |
| Core clock speed | 1354 MHz vs 725 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1493 MHz vs 775 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 59.72 GTexel / s vs 48 GTexel / s |
| Floating-point performance | 1,911 gflops vs 1,536 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm vs 28 nm |
| Memory clock speed | 7008 MHz vs 1125 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4462 vs 1204 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3721 vs 3717 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3721 vs 3717 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 M270X
- Around 20% higher pipelines: 768 vs 640
- Around 5% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 306 vs 292
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Pipelines | 768 vs 640 |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 306 vs 292 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3361 vs 3359 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3361 vs 3359 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 M270X
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) | AMD Radeon R9 M270X |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4462 | 1204 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 292 | 306 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 17470 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 67.209 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 799.414 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.536 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 30.523 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 223.683 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7239 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3721 | 3717 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3359 | 3361 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7239 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3721 | 3717 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3359 | 3361 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2084 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) | AMD Radeon R9 M270X | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | GCN 1.0 |
| Code name | GP106B | Venus |
| Launch date | 1 February 2017 | 21 March 2014 |
| Place in performance rating | 626 | 628 |
| Type | Laptop | Desktop |
| Design | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1493 MHz | 775 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1354 MHz | 725 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 1,911 gflops | 1,536 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 640 | 768 |
| Texture fill rate | 59.72 GTexel / s | 48 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | |
| Transistor count | 4,400 million | 1,500 million |
| Compute units | 10 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
| G-SYNC support | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Laptop size | large | |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 11 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
| Vulkan | ||
| Mantle | ||
| OpenCL | Not Listed | |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 112.1 GB / s | 72 GB/s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 bit |
| Memory clock speed | 7008 MHz | 1125 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| Multi Monitor | ||
| Multi-Projection | ||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| DualGraphics | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| HD3D | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| Switchable graphics | ||
| ZeroCore | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) with others
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) vs
ATIRadeon X800 XT
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) vs
AMDRadeon HD 8690M
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) vs
AMDRadeon R9 M270X
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) vs
AMDRadeon R7 360
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) vs
AMDRadeon Pro 560
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook) vs
IntelIris Xe Graphics G4
