NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs AMD Radeon R9 270

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) and AMD Radeon R9 270 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 Ti (Desktop)

• Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 11 month(s) later
• Around 50% higher boost clock speed: 1392 MHz vs 925 MHz
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
• 2x lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 150 Watt
• 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
• Around 47% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6332 vs 4306
• Around 15% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 650 vs 567
• Around 36% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 75.758 vs 55.721
• Around 15% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 301.168 vs 261.843
• 2.5x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8496 vs 3448
• 2.5x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8496 vs 3448

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 270

• Around 11% higher texture fill rate: 74 GTexel / s vs 66.82 GTexel / s
• Around 67% higher pipelines: 1280 vs 768
• Around 11% better floating-point performance: 2,368 gflops vs 2,138 gflops
• 3.6x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 74175 vs 20732
• Around 52% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1282.039 vs 843.503
• Around 17% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.927 vs 5.071
• 3.8x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 93.116 vs 24.676
• 5.3x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1603 vs 305

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 270

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	6332 4306
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	650 567
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	20732 74175
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	75.758 55.721
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	843.503 1282.039
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	5.071 5.927
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	24.676 93.116
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	301.168 261.843
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	8496 3448
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3687 3699
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3336 3347
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	8496 3448
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3687 3699
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3336 3347
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	305 1603

Compare specifications (specs)