NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) versus NVIDIA Quadro K2200
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) and NVIDIA Quadro K2200 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 2 ans 3 mois plus tard
- Environ 33% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1392 MHz versus 1046 MHz
- Environ 24% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1392 MHz versus 1124 MHz
- Environ 49% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 66.82 GTexel / s versus 44.96 GTexel / s
- Environ 20% de pipelines plus haut: 768 versus 640
- Environ 49% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2,138 gflops versus 1,439 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 28 nm
- Environ 77% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 6332 versus 3572
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 650 versus 548
- Environ 72% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 20732 versus 12020
- Environ 86% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 75.758 versus 40.695
- Environ 43% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 843.503 versus 588.094
- Environ 58% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.071 versus 3.205
- Environ 81% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 301.168 versus 166.26
- Environ 73% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8496 versus 4921
- 2.3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3687 versus 1577
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3336 versus 1671
- Environ 73% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8496 versus 4921
- 2.3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3687 versus 1577
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3336 versus 1671
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 25 October 2016 versus 22 July 2014 |
Vitesse du noyau | 1392 MHz versus 1046 MHz |
Vitesse augmenté | 1392 MHz versus 1124 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 66.82 GTexel / s versus 44.96 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 768 versus 640 |
Performance á point flottant | 2,138 gflops versus 1,439 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 28 nm |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 6332 versus 3572 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 650 versus 548 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 20732 versus 12020 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 75.758 versus 40.695 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 843.503 versus 588.094 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.071 versus 3.205 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 301.168 versus 166.26 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8496 versus 4921 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3687 versus 1577 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3336 versus 1671 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8496 versus 4921 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3687 versus 1577 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3336 versus 1671 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro K2200
- Environ 10% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 68 Watt versus 75 Watt
- 716x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 5012 MHz versus 7 GB/s
- Environ 23% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 30.455 versus 24.676
- 3.9x meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1193 versus 305
Caractéristiques | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 68 Watt versus 75 Watt |
Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz versus 7 GB/s |
Référence | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 30.455 versus 24.676 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1193 versus 305 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K2200
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) | NVIDIA Quadro K2200 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 6332 | 3572 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 650 | 548 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 20732 | 12020 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 75.758 | 40.695 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 843.503 | 588.094 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.071 | 3.205 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 24.676 | 30.455 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 301.168 | 166.26 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8496 | 4921 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3687 | 1577 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3336 | 1671 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8496 | 4921 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3687 | 1577 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3336 | 1671 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 305 | 1193 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) | NVIDIA Quadro K2200 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Pascal | Maxwell |
Nom de code | GP107 | GM107 |
Date de sortie | 25 October 2016 | 22 July 2014 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $139 | $395.75 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 487 | 787 |
Prix maintenant | $159.99 | $343.99 |
Genre | Desktop | Workstation |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 46.07 | 13.01 |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1392 MHz | 1124 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 1392 MHz | 1046 MHz |
Noyaux CUDA | 768 | |
Performance á point flottant | 2,138 gflops | 1,439 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Température maximale du GPU | 97 °C | |
Pipelines | 768 | 640 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 66.82 GTexel / s | 44.96 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 68 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 3,300 million | 1,870 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort |
Soutien de G-SYNC | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Longeur | 145 mm | 202 mm |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 4 GB | 4 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 112 GB / s | 80.19 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 7 GB/s | 5012 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision | ||
Ansel | ||
CUDA | ||
Multi Monitor | ||
Multi-Projection | ||
VR Ready |