NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs NVIDIA Quadro P4000
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti and NVIDIA Quadro P4000 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 1650 Ti
- Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 1 month(s) later
- Around 12% higher core clock speed: 1350 MHz vs 1202 MHz
- 573.2x more texture fill rate: 95.04 GTexel/s vs 165.8 GTexel / s
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 16 nm
- 2x lower typical power consumption: 50 Watt vs 100 Watt
- Around 16% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1844.67 vs 1590.392
- 2.5x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 115.919 vs 45.977
- 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 8926 vs 3714
- 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 8062 vs 3358
- 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 8926 vs 3714
- 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 8062 vs 3358
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 2 Apr 2020 vs 6 February 2017 |
Core clock speed | 1350 MHz vs 1202 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1485 MHz vs 1480 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 95.04 GTexel/s vs 165.8 GTexel / s |
Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm vs 16 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt vs 100 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1844.67 vs 1590.392 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 115.919 vs 45.977 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 8926 vs 3714 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 8062 vs 3358 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 8926 vs 3714 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 8062 vs 3358 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro P4000
- Around 75% higher pipelines: 1792 vs 1024
- 2x more maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 4 GB
- 5.1x more memory clock speed: 7604 MHz vs 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective)
- Around 54% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 11624 vs 7540
- 2.1x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 815 vs 385
- Around 6% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 11.365 vs 10.683
- Around 17% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 751.626 vs 644.054
- Around 25% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 15267 vs 12180
- Around 25% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 15267 vs 12180
- Around 34% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 4904 vs 3658
Specifications (specs) | |
Pipelines | 1792 vs 1024 |
Maximum memory size | 8 GB vs 4 GB |
Memory clock speed | 7604 MHz vs 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective) |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 11624 vs 7540 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 815 vs 385 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 42289 vs 42105 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 152.325 vs 151.899 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 11.365 vs 10.683 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 751.626 vs 644.054 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 15267 vs 12180 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 15267 vs 12180 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 4904 vs 3658 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro P4000
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 |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | NVIDIA Quadro P4000 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 7540 | 11624 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 385 | 815 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 42105 | 42289 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 151.899 | 152.325 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1844.67 | 1590.392 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 10.683 | 11.365 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 115.919 | 45.977 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 644.054 | 751.626 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12180 | 15267 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 8926 | 3714 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 8062 | 3358 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12180 | 15267 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 8926 | 3714 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 8062 | 3358 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3658 | 4904 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | NVIDIA Quadro P4000 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Turing | Pascal |
Code name | TU117 | GP104 |
Launch date | 2 Apr 2020 | 6 February 2017 |
Place in performance rating | 289 | 286 |
Type | Laptop | Workstation |
Launch price (MSRP) | $815 | |
Price now | $799.99 | |
Value for money (0-100) | 17.17 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1485 MHz | 1480 MHz |
Core clock speed | 1350 MHz | 1202 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 16 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 95.04 GFLOPS (1:32) | |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 6.083 TFLOPS (2:1) | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 3.041 TFLOPS | |
Pipelines | 1024 | 1792 |
Pixel fill rate | 47.52 GPixel/s | |
Texture fill rate | 95.04 GTexel/s | 165.8 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 100 Watt |
Transistor count | 4700 million | 7,200 million |
Floating-point performance | 5,304 gflops | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | 4x DisplayPort |
Display Port | 1.4 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Supplementary power connectors | None | 1x 6-pin |
Length | 241 mm | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.1 | 12 |
OpenCL | 1.2 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Shader Model | 6.5 | 5.1 |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 8 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 192.0 GB/s | 192 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 128 bit | 256 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective) | 7604 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Stereo | ||
Mosaic | ||
nView Display Management | ||
Optimus |