NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) vs ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) and ATI Radeon HD 4870 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 (Notebook)
- Videocard is newer: launch date 8 year(s) 5 month(s) later
- 2.1x more core clock speed: 1493 MHz vs 700 MHz
- Around 11% better floating-point performance: 2,488 gflops vs 2x 1,120.0 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 16 nm vs 55 nm
- 3.8x lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 286 Watt
- 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2x 1 GB
- Around 95% higher memory clock speed: 7008 MHz vs 3600 MHz
- 4.5x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 5918 vs 1309
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 1 February 2017 vs 12 August 2008 |
| Core clock speed | 1493 MHz vs 700 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 2,488 gflops vs 2x 1,120.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm vs 55 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt vs 286 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 2x 1 GB |
| Memory clock speed | 7008 MHz vs 3600 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 5918 vs 1309 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3336 vs 3323 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3336 vs 3323 |
Reasons to consider the ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2
- 2.9x more texture fill rate: 2x 28 GTexel / s billion / sec vs 77.76 GTexel / s
- 2.1x more pipelines: 2x 800 vs 768
- Around 75% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 565 vs 323
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Texture fill rate | 2x 28 GTexel / s billion / sec vs 77.76 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 2x 800 vs 768 |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 565 vs 323 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook)
GPU 2: ATI Radeon HD 4870 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 (Notebook) | ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 5918 | 1309 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 323 | 565 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 20732 | |
| 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 | 3323 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8496 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3687 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3336 | 3323 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2340 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) | ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | TeraScale |
| Code name | GP106B | R700 |
| Launch date | 1 February 2017 | 12 August 2008 |
| Place in performance rating | 533 | 466 |
| Type | Laptop | Desktop |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $550 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1620 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 1493 MHz | 700 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 2,488 gflops | 2x 1,120.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm | 55 nm |
| Pipelines | 768 | 2x 800 |
| Texture fill rate | 77.76 GTexel / s | 2x 28 GTexel / s billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 286 Watt |
| Transistor count | 4,400 million | 956 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video |
| G-SYNC support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Laptop size | large | |
| Length | 267 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 10.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.3 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 2x 1 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 112.1 GB / s | 2x 115.2 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 2x 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 7008 MHz | 3600 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| Multi Monitor | ||
| Multi-Projection | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) with others
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) vs
ATIRadeon X850 XT
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) vs
ATIFireGL V7300
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) vs
ATIFireGL V3300
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 740A
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) vs
NVIDIAQuadro K5200
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) vs
NVIDIAQuadro M4000
