NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs NVIDIA Quadro FX 370M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) and NVIDIA Quadro FX 370M 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 8 year(s) 2 month(s) later
- 2.5x more core clock speed: 1392 MHz vs 550 MHz
- 30.4x more texture fill rate: 66.82 GTexel / s vs 2.2 GTexel / s
- 96x more pipelines: 768 vs 8
- 95.4x better floating-point performance: 2,138 gflops vs 22.4 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 65 nm
- 16x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 256 MB
- 67.9x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6314 vs 93
- Around 94% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 648 vs 334
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 25 October 2016 vs 15 August 2008 |
| Core clock speed | 1392 MHz vs 550 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 66.82 GTexel / s vs 2.2 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 768 vs 8 |
| Floating-point performance | 2,138 gflops vs 22.4 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 65 nm |
| Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 256 MB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6314 vs 93 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 648 vs 334 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro FX 370M
- 3.8x lower typical power consumption: 20 Watt vs 75 Watt
- 171.4x more memory clock speed: 1200 MHz vs 7 GB/s
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 20 Watt vs 75 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 1200 MHz vs 7 GB/s |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro FX 370M
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) | NVIDIA Quadro FX 370M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6314 | 93 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 648 | 334 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 20687 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 75.758 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 843.503 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.071 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 24.676 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 301.168 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8496 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3687 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3336 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8496 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3687 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3336 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2337 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) | NVIDIA Quadro FX 370M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | Tesla |
| Code name | GP107 | G98 |
| Launch date | 25 October 2016 | 15 August 2008 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $139 | |
| Place in performance rating | 484 | 486 |
| Price now | $159.99 | |
| Type | Desktop | Mobile workstation |
| Value for money (0-100) | 46.07 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1392 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 1392 MHz | 550 MHz |
| CUDA cores | 768 | |
| Floating-point performance | 2,138 gflops | 22.4 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 65 nm |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 97 °C | |
| Pipelines | 768 | 8 |
| Texture fill rate | 66.82 GTexel / s | 2.2 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 20 Watt |
| Transistor count | 3,300 million | 210 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| G-SYNC support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-II |
| Length | 145 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 10.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.3 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 256 MB |
| Memory bandwidth | 112 GB / s | 9.6 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 7 GB/s | 1200 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR2, GDDR3 |
| Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision | ||
| Ansel | ||
| CUDA | ||
| Multi Monitor | ||
| Multi-Projection | ||
| VR Ready | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) with others
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs
ATIFireGL V3350
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs
NVIDIAGeForce 9650M GS
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 370M
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs
NVIDIAGRID M60-2Q
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs
AMDRadeon Pro WX 5100
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs
AMDRadeon Pro Vega 20
