NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs NVIDIA Quadro FX 4700 X2
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) and NVIDIA Quadro FX 4700 X2 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) 6 month(s) later
- 2.3x more core clock speed: 1392 MHz vs 600 MHz
- 3x more pipelines: 768 vs 2x 128
- 2.8x better floating-point performance: 2,138 gflops vs 2x 384.0 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 65 nm
- 3x lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 226 Watt
- 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2x 1 GB
- 9.4x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6321 vs 676
- Around 27% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 648 vs 509
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 25 October 2016 vs 18 April 2008 |
| Core clock speed | 1392 MHz vs 600 MHz |
| Pipelines | 768 vs 2x 128 |
| Floating-point performance | 2,138 gflops vs 2x 384.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 65 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt vs 226 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 2x 1 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6321 vs 676 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 648 vs 509 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro FX 4700 X2
- 3.6x more texture fill rate: 2x 38.4 GTexel / s billion / sec vs 66.82 GTexel / s
- 228.6x more memory clock speed: 1600 MHz vs 7 GB/s
- Around 26% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 4196 vs 3336
- Around 26% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 4196 vs 3336
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Texture fill rate | 2x 38.4 GTexel / s billion / sec vs 66.82 GTexel / s |
| Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz vs 7 GB/s |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 4196 vs 3336 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 4196 vs 3336 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro FX 4700 X2
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) | NVIDIA Quadro FX 4700 X2 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6321 | 676 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 648 | 509 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 20725 | |
| 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 | 4196 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8496 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3687 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3336 | 4196 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2336 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) | NVIDIA Quadro FX 4700 X2 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | Tesla |
| Code name | GP107 | G92 |
| Launch date | 25 October 2016 | 18 April 2008 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $139 | $2,999 |
| Place in performance rating | 476 | 475 |
| Price now | $159.99 | |
| Type | Desktop | Workstation |
| Value for money (0-100) | 46.07 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1392 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 1392 MHz | 600 MHz |
| CUDA cores | 768 | |
| Floating-point performance | 2,138 gflops | 2x 384.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 65 nm |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 97 °C | |
| Pipelines | 768 | 2x 128 |
| Texture fill rate | 66.82 GTexel / s | 2x 38.4 GTexel / s billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 226 Watt |
| Transistor count | 3,300 million | 754 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video |
| G-SYNC support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 145 mm | 267 mm |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 10.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.3 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 2x 1 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 112 GB / s | 2x 51.2 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 2x 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 7 GB/s | 1600 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
| Shared memory | 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 V7350
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 4700 X2
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs
AMDRadeon HD 7870 GHz Edition
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs
AMDRadeon HD 8760 OEM
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs
AMDRadeon Pro WX 5100
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs
NVIDIAQuadro M2200 Mobile
