NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) versus AMD Radeon R9 M295X
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) and AMD Radeon R9 M295X pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire, Technologies. 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 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 11 mois plus tard
- Environ 93% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1392 MHz versus 723 MHz
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 28 nm
- 3.3x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 75 Watt versus 250 Watt
- Environ 23% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 6322 versus 5150
- Environ 15% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 75.758 versus 65.777
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 843.503 versus 820.138
- Environ 80% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3687 versus 2045
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3336 versus 3144
- Environ 80% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3687 versus 2045
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3336 versus 3144
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 25 October 2016 versus 23 November 2014 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1392 MHz versus 723 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt versus 250 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6322 versus 5150 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 75.758 versus 65.777 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 843.503 versus 820.138 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3687 versus 2045 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3336 versus 3144 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3687 versus 2045 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3336 versus 3144 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 M295X
- Environ 38% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 92.54 GTexel / s versus 66.82 GTexel / s
- 2.7x plus de pipelines: 2048 versus 768
- Environ 38% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2,961 gflops versus 2,138 gflops
- Environ 28% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 832 versus 648
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 26899 versus 20734
- Environ 41% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 7.142 versus 5.071
- 2.8x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 68.754 versus 24.676
- Environ 28% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 386.418 versus 301.168
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 92.54 GTexel / s versus 66.82 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 2048 versus 768 |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,961 gflops versus 2,138 gflops |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 832 versus 648 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 26899 versus 20734 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 7.142 versus 5.071 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 68.754 versus 24.676 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 386.418 versus 301.168 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 M295X
| 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 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Nom | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) | AMD Radeon R9 M295X |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6322 | 5150 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 648 | 832 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 20734 | 26899 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 75.758 | 65.777 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 843.503 | 820.138 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.071 | 7.142 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 24.676 | 68.754 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 301.168 | 386.418 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8496 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3687 | 2045 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3336 | 3144 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8496 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3687 | 2045 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3336 | 3144 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 306 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) | AMD Radeon R9 M295X | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | GCN 3.0 |
| Nom de code | GP107 | Amethyst |
| Date de sortie | 25 October 2016 | 23 November 2014 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $139 | |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 495 | 494 |
| Prix maintenant | $159.99 | |
| Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 46.07 | |
| Conception | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1392 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1392 MHz | 723 MHz |
| Noyaux CUDA | 768 | |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,138 gflops | 2,961 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Température maximale du GPU | 97 °C | |
| Pipelines | 768 | 2048 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 66.82 GTexel / s | 92.54 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 250 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 3,300 million | 5,000 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| Soutien de G-SYNC | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Longeur | 145 mm | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | |
| Taille du laptop | large | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | Not Listed |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
| Vulkan | ||
| Mantle | ||
| OpenCL | Not Listed | |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 112 GB / s | 160.0 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 7 GB/s | |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | Not Listed |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision | ||
| Ansel | ||
| CUDA | ||
| Multi Monitor | ||
| Multi-Projection | ||
| VR Ready | ||
| DualGraphics | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| HD3D | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| Graphiques changeables | ||
| ZeroCore | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs
NVIDIAGeForce 9650M GS
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 370M
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs
NVIDIAGRID K240Q
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs
AMDRadeon R9 M295X
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs
NVIDIAQuadro M3000M
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs
AMDRadeon Pro WX 4130 Mobile
