NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) versus Intel HD Graphics 630
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) and Intel HD Graphics 630 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 mois plus tard
- 4x plus de vitesse du noyau: 1392 MHz versus 350 MHz
- Environ 21% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1392 MHz versus 1150 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 66.82 GTexel / s versus 27.6 GTexel / s
- 32x plus de pipelines: 768 versus 24
- 4.8x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2,138 gflops versus 441.6 gflops
- 5.7x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 6332 versus 1114
- 2.4x meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 650 versus 268
- 4.6x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 20732 versus 4554
- 2.7x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 75.758 versus 27.948
- 2.7x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 843.503 versus 312.246
- 2.8x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.071 versus 1.795
- Environ 21% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 24.676 versus 20.404
- 9.2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 301.168 versus 32.567
- 4.6x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8496 versus 1859
- Environ 90% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3687 versus 1945
- 4.6x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8496 versus 1859
- Environ 90% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3687 versus 1945
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 25 October 2016 versus 30 August 2016 |
Vitesse du noyau | 1392 MHz versus 350 MHz |
Vitesse augmenté | 1392 MHz versus 1150 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 66.82 GTexel / s versus 27.6 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 768 versus 24 |
Performance á point flottant | 2,138 gflops versus 441.6 gflops |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 6332 versus 1114 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 650 versus 268 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 20732 versus 4554 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 75.758 versus 27.948 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 843.503 versus 312.246 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.071 versus 1.795 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 24.676 versus 20.404 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 301.168 versus 32.567 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8496 versus 1859 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3687 versus 1945 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8496 versus 1859 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3687 versus 1945 |
Raisons pour considerer le Intel HD Graphics 630
- 5x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 15 Watt versus 75 Watt
- 16x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 64 GB versus 4 GB
- Environ 27% meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 388 versus 305
Caractéristiques | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt versus 75 Watt |
Taille de mémore maximale | 64 GB versus 4 GB |
Référence | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3344 versus 3336 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3344 versus 3336 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 388 versus 305 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)
GPU 2: Intel HD Graphics 630
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 |
|
|
Nom | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) | Intel HD Graphics 630 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 6332 | 1114 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 650 | 268 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 20732 | 4554 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 75.758 | 27.948 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 843.503 | 312.246 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.071 | 1.795 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 24.676 | 20.404 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 301.168 | 32.567 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8496 | 1859 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3687 | 1945 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3336 | 3344 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8496 | 1859 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3687 | 1945 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3336 | 3344 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 305 | 388 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) | Intel HD Graphics 630 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Pascal | Generation 9.5 |
Nom de code | GP107 | Kaby Lake GT2 |
Date de sortie | 25 October 2016 | 30 August 2016 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $139 | |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 487 | 1216 |
Prix maintenant | $159.99 | |
Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 46.07 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1392 MHz | 1150 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 1392 MHz | 350 MHz |
Noyaux CUDA | 768 | |
Performance á point flottant | 2,138 gflops | 441.6 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 14 nm |
Température maximale du GPU | 97 °C | |
Pipelines | 768 | 24 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 66.82 GTexel / s | 27.6 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 15 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 3,300 million | 189 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 3.0 x1 |
Longeur | 145 mm | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (12_1) |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 4 GB | 64 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 | DDR3L / LPDDR3 / LPDDR4 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | 1 |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision | ||
Ansel | ||
CUDA | ||
Multi Monitor | ||
Multi-Projection | ||
VR Ready |