NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) versus Intel HD Graphics 4000
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) and Intel HD Graphics 4000 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 4 ans 5 mois plus tard
- 2.1x plus de vitesse du noyau: 1392 MHz versus 650 MHz
- Environ 33% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1392 MHz versus 1050 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 66.82 GTexel / s versus 4.2 GTexel / s
- 48x plus de pipelines: 768 versus 16
- 63.6x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2,138 gflops versus 33.6 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 22 nm
- 18.2x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 6332 versus 347
- 3.4x meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 650 versus 194
- 38.5x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 20732 versus 538
- 8.7x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 75.758 versus 8.712
- 5.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 843.503 versus 155.638
- 5.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.071 versus 0.931
- 3.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 24.676 versus 7.36
- 25.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 301.168 versus 12.009
- 11.3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8496 versus 754
- 2.5x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3687 versus 1492
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3336 versus 2392
- 11.3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8496 versus 754
- 2.5x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3687 versus 1492
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3336 versus 2392
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 25 October 2016 versus 14 May 2012 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1392 MHz versus 650 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1392 MHz versus 1050 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 66.82 GTexel / s versus 4.2 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 768 versus 16 |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,138 gflops versus 33.6 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 22 nm |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6332 versus 347 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 650 versus 194 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 20732 versus 538 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 75.758 versus 8.712 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 843.503 versus 155.638 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.071 versus 0.931 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 24.676 versus 7.36 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 301.168 versus 12.009 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8496 versus 754 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3687 versus 1492 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3336 versus 2392 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8496 versus 754 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3687 versus 1492 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3336 versus 2392 |
Raisons pour considerer le Intel HD Graphics 4000
- Environ 67% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 45 Watt versus 75 Watt
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt versus 75 Watt |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)
GPU 2: Intel HD Graphics 4000
| 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 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) | Intel HD Graphics 4000 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6332 | 347 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 650 | 194 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 20732 | 538 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 75.758 | 8.712 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 843.503 | 155.638 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.071 | 0.931 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 24.676 | 7.36 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 301.168 | 12.009 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8496 | 754 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3687 | 1492 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3336 | 2392 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8496 | 754 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3687 | 1492 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3336 | 2392 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 305 | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) | Intel HD Graphics 4000 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | Generation 7.0 |
| Nom de code | GP107 | Ivy Bridge GT2 |
| Date de sortie | 25 October 2016 | 14 May 2012 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $139 | |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 487 | 1501 |
| Prix maintenant | $159.99 | |
| Genre | Desktop | Laptop |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 46.07 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1392 MHz | 1050 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1392 MHz | 650 MHz |
| Noyaux CUDA | 768 | |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,138 gflops | 33.6 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 22 nm |
| Température maximale du GPU | 97 °C | |
| Pipelines | 768 | 16 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 66.82 GTexel / s | 4.2 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 45 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 3,300 million | 1,200 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 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 145 mm | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 11.1 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.0 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 112 GB / s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 64 / 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 7 GB/s | |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | 1 |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision | ||
| Ansel | ||
| CUDA | ||
| Multi Monitor | ||
| Multi-Projection | ||
| VR Ready | ||
| Quick Sync | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs
ATIFireGL V3400
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 4700 X2
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs
NVIDIAGRID K240Q
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs
AMDRadeon R7 A265
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs
AMDRadeon RX 470 (Laptop)
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) vs
AMDRadeon RX 560X (Laptop)
