NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs NVIDIA Quadro M3000M

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) and NVIDIA Quadro M3000M 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 1 year(s) 2 month(s) later
• Around 33% higher core clock speed: 1392 MHz vs 1050 MHz
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
• Around 12% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6322 vs 5627
• Around 55% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 648 vs 417
• Around 25% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 20734 vs 16621
• Around 3% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.071 vs 4.91
• Around 19% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 301.168 vs 252.607
• Around 9% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8496 vs 7779
• Around 9% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8496 vs 7779

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M

• Around 1% higher texture fill rate: 67.2 GTexel / s vs 66.82 GTexel / s
• Around 33% higher pipelines: 1,024 vs 768
• Around 1% better floating-point performance: 2,150 gflops vs 2,138 gflops
• 716x more memory clock speed: 5012 MHz vs 7 GB/s
• Around 9% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 82.563 vs 75.758
• Around 50% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1266.506 vs 843.503
• 2.9x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 70.779 vs 24.676
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3720 vs 3687
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3360 vs 3336
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3720 vs 3687
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3360 vs 3336

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro M3000M

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	6322 5627
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	648 417
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	20734 16621
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	75.758 82.563
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	843.503 1266.506
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	5.071 4.91
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	24.676 70.779
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	301.168 252.607
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	8496 7779
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3687 3720
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3336 3360
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	8496 7779
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3687 3720
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3336 3360

Compare specifications (specs)