NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) versus AMD Radeon RX 460 (Desktop)
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) and AMD Radeon RX 460 (Desktop) 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 5 mois plus tard
- Environ 37% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1493 MHz versus 1090 MHz
- Environ 35% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1620 MHz versus 1200 MHz
- Environ 16% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 77.76 GTexel / s versus 67.2 GTexel / s
- 1130.9x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2,488 gflops versus 2.2 TFLOPs
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 4 GB versus 2 GB
- Environ 44% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 5919 versus 4101
- Environ 18% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 20734 versus 17592
- Environ 38% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 75.758 versus 55
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.071 versus 4.656
- Environ 27% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 301.168 versus 237.944
- Environ 25% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8496 versus 6821
- 73.6x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8496 versus 115.4
- Environ 35% meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 2340 versus 1730
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 1 February 2017 versus 8 August 2016 |
Vitesse du noyau | 1493 MHz versus 1090 MHz |
Vitesse augmenté | 1620 MHz versus 1200 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 77.76 GTexel / s versus 67.2 GTexel / s |
Performance á point flottant | 2,488 gflops versus 2.2 TFLOPs |
Taille de mémore maximale | 4 GB versus 2 GB |
Vitesse de mémoire | 7008 MHz versus 7000 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 5919 versus 4101 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 20734 versus 17592 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 75.758 versus 55 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.071 versus 4.656 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 301.168 versus 237.944 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8496 versus 6821 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8496 versus 115.4 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2340 versus 1730 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon RX 460 (Desktop)
- Environ 17% de pipelines plus haut: 896 versus 768
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 16 nm
- Environ 7% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 70 Watt versus 75 Watt
- Environ 79% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 577 versus 323
- Environ 15% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 970.421 versus 843.503
- 3.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 76.881 versus 24.676
Caractéristiques | |
Pipelines | 896 versus 768 |
Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 16 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 70 Watt versus 75 Watt |
Référence | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 577 versus 323 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 970.421 versus 843.503 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 76.881 versus 24.676 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook)
GPU 2: AMD Radeon RX 460 (Desktop)
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 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score |
|
|
Nom | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) | AMD Radeon RX 460 (Desktop) |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 5919 | 4101 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 323 | 577 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 20734 | 17592 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 75.758 | 55 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 843.503 | 970.421 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.071 | 4.656 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 24.676 | 76.881 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 301.168 | 237.944 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8496 | 6821 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3687 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3336 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8496 | 115.4 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3687 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3336 | |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2340 | 1730 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) | AMD Radeon RX 460 (Desktop) | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Pascal | GCN 4.0 |
Nom de code | GP106B | Baffin |
Date de sortie | 1 February 2017 | 8 August 2016 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 545 | 546 |
Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
Conception | Radeon RX 400 Series | |
Génération GCN | 4th Gen | |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $86 | |
Prix maintenant | $179.50 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 33.86 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1620 MHz | 1200 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 1493 MHz | 1090 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 2,488 gflops | 2.2 TFLOPs |
Processus de fabrication | 16 nm | 14 nm |
Pipelines | 768 | 896 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 77.76 GTexel / s | 67.2 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 70 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 4,400 million | 3,000 million |
Unités de Compute | 14 | |
GPU Power | 35-48 Watt | |
Stream Processors | 896 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
Soutien de G-SYNC | ||
Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
HDMI | ||
VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
Taille du laptop | large | |
Bridgeless CrossFire | ||
Longeur | 170 mm | |
Énergie du systeme recommandé (PSU) | 400 Watt | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Vulkan | ||
OpenCL | 2.0 | |
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 4 GB | 2 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 112.1 GB / s | 112 GB/s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 7008 MHz | 7000 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
Multi Monitor | ||
Multi-Projection | ||
4K H264 Decode | ||
4K H264 Encode | ||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
AMD Radeon™ Chill | ||
AMD Radeon™ ReLive | ||
DisplayPort 1.3 HBR / 1.4 HDR Ready | ||
FreeSync | ||
H265/HEVC Decode | ||
H265/HEVC Encode | ||
HDMI 2.0 | ||
HDMI 4K Support | ||
PowerTune | ||
Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
Virtual Super Resolution (VSR) | ||
ZeroCore |