NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti and NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M 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 650 Ti
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 1 month(s) later
- 5.6x more texture fill rate: 59.2 billion / sec vs 10.6 billion / sec
- 5.3x more pipelines: 768 vs 144
- 4.2x better floating-point performance: 1,425 gflops vs 339.8 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
- 3.1x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2525 vs 811
- 2x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 411 vs 203
- Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3707 vs 3274
- Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3707 vs 3274
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 9 October 2012 vs 3 September 2010 |
Texture fill rate | 59.2 billion / sec vs 10.6 billion / sec |
Pipelines | 768 vs 144 |
Floating-point performance | 1,425 gflops vs 339.8 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 40 nm |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2525 vs 811 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 411 vs 203 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3707 vs 3274 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3707 vs 3274 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M
- Around 27% higher core clock speed: 1180 MHz vs 928 MHz
- 3.1x lower typical power consumption: 35 Watt vs 110 Watt
- 3x more maximum memory size: 3 GB vs 1 GB
- 250x more memory clock speed: 1250 MHz vs 5.4 GB/s
- Around 55% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 12379 vs 7973
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 1180 MHz vs 928 MHz |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt vs 110 Watt |
Maximum memory size | 3 GB vs 1 GB |
Memory clock speed | 1250 MHz vs 5.4 GB/s |
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 12379 vs 7973 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3350 vs 3335 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3350 vs 3335 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti | NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2525 | 811 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 411 | 203 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 7973 | 12379 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 23.168 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 592.345 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.141 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 28.29 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 47.404 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3948 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3707 | 3274 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3335 | 3350 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3948 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3707 | 3274 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3335 | 3350 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 881 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti | NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Kepler | Fermi |
Code name | GK106 | GF106 |
Launch date | 9 October 2012 | 3 September 2010 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $149 | |
Place in performance rating | 876 | 878 |
Price now | $169.99 | |
Type | Desktop | Laptop |
Value for money (0-100) | 18.72 | |
Technical info |
||
Core clock speed | 928 MHz | 1180 MHz |
CUDA cores | 768 | 144 |
Floating-point performance | 1,425 gflops | 339.8 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Maximum GPU temperature | 105 °C | |
Pipelines | 768 | 144 |
Texture fill rate | 59.2 billion / sec | 10.6 billion / sec |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 110 Watt | 35 Watt |
Transistor count | 2,540 million | 1,170 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Audio input for HDMI | Internal | |
Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI, One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One Mini... | No outputs |
HDCP | ||
HDMI | ||
Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Length | 5.7" (14.5 cm) | |
Supplementary power connectors | One 6-pin | |
Laptop size | large | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12 API |
OpenGL | 4.3 | 4.5 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 3 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 86.4 GB / s | 60.0 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 192 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 5.4 GB/s | 1250 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Blu-Ray | ||
3D Gaming | ||
3D Vision | ||
Adaptive VSync | ||
CUDA | ||
FXAA | ||
TXAA | ||
DirectCompute | ||
DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
Optimus | ||
SLI |