NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q vs AMD Radeon R9 270

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q 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 Max-Q

• Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 1 month(s) later
• Around 53% higher boost clock speed: 1417 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 24% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 5357 vs 4306
• Around 12% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 293.638 vs 261.843
• 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8059 vs 3448
• 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8059 vs 3448
• Around 38% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 2219 vs 1603

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 270

• Around 9% higher texture fill rate: 74 GTexel / s vs 68.02 GTexel / s
• Around 67% higher pipelines: 1280 vs 768
• Around 9% better floating-point performance: 2,368 gflops vs 2,177 gflops
• Around 34% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 567 vs 422
• 3.7x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 74175 vs 19807
• Around 3% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 55.721 vs 54.188
• Around 11% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1282.039 vs 1159.046
• Around 8% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.927 vs 5.507
• Around 13% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 93.116 vs 82.067
• Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3699 vs 3579
• Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3699 vs 3579

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 270

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	5357 4306
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	422 567
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	19807 74175
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	54.188 55.721
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1159.046 1282.039
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	5.507 5.927
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	82.067 93.116
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	293.638 261.843
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	8059 3448
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3579 3699
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 3347
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	8059 3448
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3579 3699
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 3347
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	2219 1603

Compare specifications (specs)