NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) versus AMD Radeon R9 370X
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) and AMD Radeon R9 370X 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 1 ans 5 mois plus tard
- Environ 52% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1493 MHz versus 980 MHz
- Environ 57% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1620 MHz versus 1030 MHz
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 16 nm versus 28 nm
- 2.4x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 75 Watt versus 180 Watt
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 4 GB versus 2 GB
- Environ 25% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 7008 MHz versus 5600 MHz
- Environ 16% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 75.758 versus 65.071
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8496 versus 8393
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8496 versus 8393
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 1 February 2017 versus 27 August 2015 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1493 MHz versus 980 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1620 MHz versus 1030 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 16 nm versus 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt versus 180 Watt |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 4 GB versus 2 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 7008 MHz versus 5600 MHz |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 75.758 versus 65.071 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8496 versus 8393 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8496 versus 8393 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 370X
- Environ 6% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 82.4 GTexel / s versus 77.76 GTexel / s
- Environ 67% de pipelines plus haut: 1280 versus 768
- Environ 6% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2,637 gflops versus 2,488 gflops
- Environ 24% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 25659 versus 20734
- Environ 35% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1139.703 versus 843.503
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.39 versus 5.071
- 3.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 88.44 versus 24.676
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 337.583 versus 301.168
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 82.4 GTexel / s versus 77.76 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1280 versus 768 |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,637 gflops versus 2,488 gflops |
| Référence | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 25659 versus 20734 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1139.703 versus 843.503 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.39 versus 5.071 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 88.44 versus 24.676 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 337.583 versus 301.168 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3704 versus 3687 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3348 versus 3336 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3704 versus 3687 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3348 versus 3336 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook)
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 370X
| 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 R9 370X |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 5919 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 323 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 20734 | 25659 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 75.758 | 65.071 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 843.503 | 1139.703 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.071 | 5.39 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 24.676 | 88.44 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 301.168 | 337.583 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8496 | 8393 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3687 | 3704 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3336 | 3348 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8496 | 8393 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3687 | 3704 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3336 | 3348 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2340 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) | AMD Radeon R9 370X | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | GCN 1.0 |
| Nom de code | GP106B | Trinidad |
| Date de sortie | 1 February 2017 | 27 August 2015 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 545 | 547 |
| Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $199 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1620 MHz | 1030 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1493 MHz | 980 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,488 gflops | 2,637 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 16 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 768 | 1280 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 77.76 GTexel / s | 82.4 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 180 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 4,400 million | 2,800 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| Soutien de G-SYNC | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Taille du laptop | large | |
| Longeur | 221 mm | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 2x 6-pin | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 2 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 112.1 GB / s | 179.2 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 7008 MHz | 5600 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 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 X700 PRO
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 3870
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) vs
NVIDIAGRID K280Q
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) vs
AMDRadeon R9 370X
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) vs
AMDRadeon RX 460 (Desktop)
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) vs
NVIDIAQuadro P1000 Mobile
