NVIDIA Quadro P620 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook)
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro P620 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) 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 Quadro P620
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 0 month(s) later
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 16 nm
- Around 88% lower typical power consumption: 40 Watt vs 75 Watt
- Around 70% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 549 vs 323
- 2.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 53.425 vs 24.676
- Around 5% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3881 vs 3687
- Around 99% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 6631 vs 3336
- Around 5% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3881 vs 3687
- Around 99% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 6631 vs 3336
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 1 February 2018 vs 1 February 2017 |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 16 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 40 Watt vs 75 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 549 vs 323 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 53.425 vs 24.676 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3881 vs 3687 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 6631 vs 3336 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3881 vs 3687 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 6631 vs 3336 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook)
- Around 18% higher core clock speed: 1493 MHz vs 1266 MHz
- Around 20% higher boost clock speed: 1620 MHz vs 1354 MHz
- Around 67% higher texture fill rate: 77.76 GTexel / s vs 46.56 GTexel / s
- Around 50% higher pipelines: 768 vs 512
- Around 67% better floating-point performance: 2,488 gflops vs 1,490 gflops
- 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
- Around 40% higher memory clock speed: 7008 MHz vs 5012 MHz
- Around 61% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 5918 vs 3670
- Around 66% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 20732 vs 12475
- Around 73% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 75.758 vs 43.877
- Around 9% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 843.503 vs 773.248
- Around 65% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.071 vs 3.082
- Around 63% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 301.168 vs 184.343
- 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8496 vs 3575
- 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8496 vs 3575
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 1493 MHz vs 1266 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1620 MHz vs 1354 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 77.76 GTexel / s vs 46.56 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 768 vs 512 |
Floating-point performance | 2,488 gflops vs 1,490 gflops |
Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 2 GB |
Memory clock speed | 7008 MHz vs 5012 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 5918 vs 3670 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 20732 vs 12475 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 75.758 vs 43.877 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 843.503 vs 773.248 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.071 vs 3.082 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 301.168 vs 184.343 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8496 vs 3575 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8496 vs 3575 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P620
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook)
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) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA Quadro P620 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3670 | 5918 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 549 | 323 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 12475 | 20732 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 43.877 | 75.758 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 773.248 | 843.503 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.082 | 5.071 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 53.425 | 24.676 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 184.343 | 301.168 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3575 | 8496 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3881 | 3687 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 6631 | 3336 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3575 | 8496 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3881 | 3687 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 6631 | 3336 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2340 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA Quadro P620 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Pascal | Pascal |
Code name | GP107 | GP106B |
Launch date | 1 February 2018 | 1 February 2017 |
Place in performance rating | 583 | 533 |
Price now | $176.99 | |
Type | Workstation | Laptop |
Value for money (0-100) | 25.53 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1354 MHz | 1620 MHz |
Core clock speed | 1266 MHz | 1493 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 1,490 gflops | 2,488 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 16 nm |
Pipelines | 512 | 768 |
Texture fill rate | 46.56 GTexel / s | 77.76 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 40 Watt | 75 Watt |
Transistor count | 3,300 million | 4,400 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 4x mini-DisplayPort | No outputs |
G-SYNC support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Length | 145 mm | |
Supplementary power connectors | None | |
Laptop size | large | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (12_1) |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 4 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 64.19 GB / s | 112.1 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz | 7008 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
Multi Monitor | ||
Multi-Projection |