NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q versus NVIDIA Quadro P1000
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q and NVIDIA Quadro P1000 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 Max-Q
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 10 mois plus tard
- Environ 15% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 68.02 GTexel / s versus 59.2 GTexel / s
- Environ 50% de pipelines plus haut: 768 versus 512
- Environ 15% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2,177 gflops versus 1,894 gflops
- Environ 40% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 7008 MHz versus 5012 MHz
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 5339 versus 4464
- Environ 27% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 19845 versus 15667
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1159.046 versus 832.248
- Environ 36% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.507 versus 4.039
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 82.067 versus 65.117
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 293.638 versus 245.081
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8059 versus 6796
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8059 versus 6796
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 2219 versus 1591
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 3 January 2018 versus 7 February 2017 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 68.02 GTexel / s versus 59.2 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 768 versus 512 |
Performance á point flottant | 2,177 gflops versus 1,894 gflops |
Vitesse de mémoire | 7008 MHz versus 5012 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 5339 versus 4464 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 19845 versus 15667 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1159.046 versus 832.248 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.507 versus 4.039 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 82.067 versus 65.117 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 293.638 versus 245.081 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8059 versus 6796 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 3348 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8059 versus 6796 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 3348 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2219 versus 1591 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro P1000
- Environ 10% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1266 MHz versus 1152 MHz
- Environ 4% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1480 MHz versus 1417 MHz
- Environ 60% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 47 Watt versus 75 Watt
- Environ 71% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 595 versus 348
- Environ 33% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 71.86 versus 54.188
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3702 versus 3579
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3702 versus 3579
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 1266 MHz versus 1152 MHz |
Vitesse augmenté | 1480 MHz versus 1417 MHz |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 47 Watt versus 75 Watt |
Référence | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 595 versus 348 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 71.86 versus 54.188 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3702 versus 3579 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3702 versus 3579 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro P1000
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 Max-Q | NVIDIA Quadro P1000 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 5339 | 4464 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 348 | 595 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 19845 | 15667 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 54.188 | 71.86 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1159.046 | 832.248 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.507 | 4.039 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 82.067 | 65.117 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 293.638 | 245.081 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8059 | 6796 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3579 | 3702 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3348 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8059 | 6796 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3579 | 3702 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3348 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2219 | 1591 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q | NVIDIA Quadro P1000 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Pascal | Pascal |
Nom de code | GP107 | GP107 |
Date de sortie | 3 January 2018 | 7 February 2017 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 530 | 532 |
Genre | Laptop | Workstation |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $375 | |
Prix maintenant | $319.99 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 15.53 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1417 MHz | 1480 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 1152 MHz | 1266 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 2,177 gflops | 1,894 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 14 nm |
Pipelines | 768 | 512 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 68.02 GTexel / s | 59.2 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 47 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 3,300 million | 3,300 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort |
Soutien de G-SYNC | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
Longeur | 145 mm | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (12_1) |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 4 GB | 4 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 112.1 GB / s | 80.19 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 7008 MHz | 5012 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
Multi Monitor | ||
Multi-Projection | ||
VR Ready |