NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) versus AMD Radeon R7 M445
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) and AMD Radeon R7 M445 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 (Notebook)
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 8 mois plus tard
- Environ 91% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1493 MHz versus 780 MHz
- Environ 76% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1620 MHz versus 920 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 77.76 GTexel / s versus 18.4 GTexel / s
- 2.4x plus de pipelines: 768 versus 320
- 4.2x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2,488 gflops versus 588.8 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 16 nm versus 28 nm
- Environ 75% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 7008 MHz versus 4000 MHz
- 6.3x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 5918 versus 939
- Environ 84% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 323 versus 176
- 3.9x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 20732 versus 5361
- 4.8x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 75.758 versus 15.765
- 3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 843.503 versus 278.624
- 4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.071 versus 1.268
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 24.676 versus 24.335
- 5.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 301.168 versus 54.067
- 4.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8496 versus 1913
- Environ 72% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3687 versus 2138
- Environ 80% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3336 versus 1853
- 4.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8496 versus 1913
- Environ 72% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3687 versus 2138
- Environ 80% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3336 versus 1853
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 1 February 2017 versus 15 May 2016 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1493 MHz versus 780 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1620 MHz versus 920 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 77.76 GTexel / s versus 18.4 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 768 versus 320 |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,488 gflops versus 588.8 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 16 nm versus 28 nm |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 7008 MHz versus 4000 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 5918 versus 939 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 323 versus 176 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 20732 versus 5361 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 75.758 versus 15.765 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 843.503 versus 278.624 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.071 versus 1.268 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 24.676 versus 24.335 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 301.168 versus 54.067 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8496 versus 1913 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3687 versus 2138 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3336 versus 1853 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8496 versus 1913 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3687 versus 2138 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3336 versus 1853 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R7 M445
- 3x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 15-25 Watt versus 75 Watt
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15-25 Watt versus 75 Watt |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook)
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 M445
| 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 (Notebook) | AMD Radeon R7 M445 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 5918 | 939 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 323 | 176 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 20732 | 5361 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 75.758 | 15.765 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 843.503 | 278.624 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.071 | 1.268 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 24.676 | 24.335 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 301.168 | 54.067 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8496 | 1913 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3687 | 2138 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3336 | 1853 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8496 | 1913 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3687 | 2138 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3336 | 1853 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2340 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) | AMD Radeon R7 M445 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | GCN 3.0 |
| Nom de code | GP106B | Meso |
| Date de sortie | 1 February 2017 | 15 May 2016 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 533 | 1296 |
| Genre | Laptop | Laptop |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1620 MHz | 920 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1493 MHz | 780 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,488 gflops | 588.8 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 16 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 768 | 320 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 77.76 GTexel / s | 18.4 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 15-25 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 4,400 million | 3,100 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
| Soutien de G-SYNC | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Taille du laptop | large | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (12_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 112.1 GB / s | 32 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 7008 MHz | 4000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
| Multi Monitor | ||
| Multi-Projection | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) vs
ATIRadeon X850 XT
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) vs
ATIFireGL V7300
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) vs
ATIFireGL V3300
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 740A
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) vs
NVIDIAQuadro K5200
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) vs
NVIDIAQuadro M4000
