NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER versus NVIDIA Tesla T4
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER and NVIDIA Tesla T4 pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire. 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 1650 SUPER
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 2 mois plus tard
- Environ 52% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1530 MHz versus 1005 MHz
- Environ 14% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1725 MHz versus 1515 MHz
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 753 versus 596
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 178.926 versus 127.622
- Environ 88% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3715 versus 1976
- Environ 88% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3357 versus 1781
- Environ 88% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3715 versus 1976
- Environ 88% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3357 versus 1781
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 22 Nov 2019 versus 13 September 2018 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1530 MHz versus 1005 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1725 MHz versus 1515 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 753 versus 596 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 178.926 versus 127.622 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 versus 1976 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 versus 1781 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 versus 1976 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 versus 1781 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Tesla T4
- Environ 33% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 75 Watt versus 100 Watt
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 10909 versus 10144
- Environ 11% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 61276 versus 55409
- Environ 56% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 3026.812 versus 1940.024
- Environ 68% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 18.798 versus 11.167
- Environ 17% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 119.936 versus 102.69
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 910.721 versus 802.026
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 14076 versus 13569
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 14076 versus 13569
| Caractéristiques | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt versus 100 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 10909 versus 10144 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 61276 versus 55409 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3026.812 versus 1940.024 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 18.798 versus 11.167 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 119.936 versus 102.69 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 910.721 versus 802.026 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 14076 versus 13569 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 14076 versus 13569 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
GPU 2: NVIDIA Tesla T4
| 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 1650 SUPER | NVIDIA Tesla T4 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 10144 | 10909 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 753 | 596 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 55409 | 61276 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 178.926 | 127.622 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1940.024 | 3026.812 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 11.167 | 18.798 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 102.69 | 119.936 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 802.026 | 910.721 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 13569 | 14076 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 | 1976 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 | 1781 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 13569 | 14076 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 | 1976 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 | 1781 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 4670 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER | NVIDIA Tesla T4 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Turing | Turing |
| Nom de code | TU116 | TU104 |
| Date de sortie | 22 Nov 2019 | 13 September 2018 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 269 | 262 |
| Genre | Desktop | Workstation |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1725 MHz | 1515 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1530 MHz | 1005 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 12 nm | 12 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 138.0 GFLOPS (1:32) | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 8.832 TFLOPS (2:1) | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 4.416 TFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 1280 | |
| Pixel fill rate | 55.20 GPixel/s | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 138.0 GTexel/s | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 6600 million | 13,600 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 1xDVI, 1xHDMI, 1xDisplayPort | No outputs |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| HDMI | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 9 inches (229 mm) | |
| Énergie du systeme recommandé (PSU) | 350 Watt | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 6-pin | None |
| Largeur | Dual-slot | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 192 GB/s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 10000 MHz | |
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 SUPER vs
AMDRadeon R9 M485X
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 SUPER vs
AMDRadeon Pro 5600M
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 SUPER vs
NVIDIAGeForce RTX 3050 Ti
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 SUPER vs
AMDRadeon Pro W6600M
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 SUPER vs
NVIDIARTX A2000 Mobile
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 SUPER vs
AMDRadeon RX 6500M
