Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4 versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
Comparaison des cartes vidéo Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire. Analyse du performance de référence des cartes vidéo: 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.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 5 mois plus tard
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 10 nm versus 12 nm
- 3.3x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 15 Watt versus 50 Watt
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 383 versus 380
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 2 Sep 2020 versus 2 Apr 2020 |
| Processus de fabrication | 10 nm versus 12 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt versus 50 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 383 versus 380 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
- 4.5x plus de vitesse du noyau: 1350 MHz versus 300 MHz
- Environ 35% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1485 MHz versus 1100 MHz
- Environ 80% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 95.04 GTexel/s versus 52.80 GTexel/s
- 2.7x plus de pipelines: 1024 versus 384
- 2.8x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 7539 versus 2666
- 3.5x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 41907 versus 11991
- Environ 91% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 152.235 versus 79.859
- Environ 62% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1843.045 versus 1137.615
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 10.681 versus 4.569
- Environ 87% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 115.607 versus 61.688
- 3.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 644.098 versus 192.566
- 2.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 12180 versus 5609
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 8926 versus 3708
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 8062 versus 3356
- 2.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 12180 versus 5609
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 8926 versus 3708
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 8062 versus 3356
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1350 MHz versus 300 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1485 MHz versus 1100 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 95.04 GTexel/s versus 52.80 GTexel/s |
| Pipelines | 1024 versus 384 |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7539 versus 2666 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 41907 versus 11991 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 152.235 versus 79.859 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1843.045 versus 1137.615 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 10.681 versus 4.569 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 115.607 versus 61.688 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 644.098 versus 192.566 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12180 versus 5609 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 8926 versus 3708 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 8062 versus 3356 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12180 versus 5609 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 8926 versus 3708 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 8062 versus 3356 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
| 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) |
|
|
| Nom | Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2666 | 7539 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 383 | 380 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 11991 | 41907 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 79.859 | 152.235 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1137.615 | 1843.045 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.569 | 10.681 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 61.688 | 115.607 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 192.566 | 644.098 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5609 | 12180 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3708 | 8926 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 | 8062 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5609 | 12180 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3708 | 8926 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 | 8062 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3656 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Generation 12.0 | Turing |
| Nom de code | Tiger Lake GT1 | TU117 |
| Date de sortie | 2 Sep 2020 | 2 Apr 2020 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 594 | 267 |
| Genre | Laptop | Laptop |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1100 MHz | 1485 MHz |
| Unités de Compute | 48 | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 300 MHz | 1350 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 10 nm | 12 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 211.2 GFLOPS | 95.04 GFLOPS (1:32) |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 1.690 TFLOPS | 6.083 TFLOPS (2:1) |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 844.8 GFLOPS | 3.041 TFLOPS |
| Pipelines | 384 | 1024 |
| Pixel fill rate | 13.20 GPixel/s | 47.52 GPixel/s |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 52.80 GTexel/s | 95.04 GTexel/s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 4700 million | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Largeur | IGP | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.1 |
| OpenCL | 2.1 | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.5 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 192.0 GB/s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective) | |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | |
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4 avec des autres
IntelIris Xe Graphics G4 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 555 OEM
IntelIris Xe Graphics G4 vs
AMDRadeon HD 7550M
IntelIris Xe Graphics G4 vs
AMDRadeon HD 7970M
IntelIris Xe Graphics G4 vs
NVIDIANVS 810
IntelIris Xe Graphics G4 vs
AMDRadeon Pro WX 4100
IntelIris Xe Graphics G4 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
