NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti versus AMD Radeon R9 290

Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti and AMD Radeon R9 290 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.

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti

versus

AMD Radeon R9 290

Différences

Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti

La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 6 ans 4 mois plus tard
Environ 43% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1350 MHz versus 947 MHz
times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 95.04 GTexel/s versus 151.5 GTexel / s
Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 12 nm versus 28 nm
5.5x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 50 Watt versus 275 Watt
Environ 70% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 152.235 versus 89.325
Environ 35% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1843.045 versus 1366.314
Environ 6% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 10.681 versus 10.034
Environ 17% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 115.607 versus 98.765
Environ 19% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 644.098 versus 540.645
Environ 93% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 12180 versus 6300
2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 8926 versus 3711
2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 8062 versus 3354
Environ 93% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 12180 versus 6300
2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 8926 versus 3711
2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 8062 versus 3354

Caractéristiques
Date de sortie	2 Apr 2020 versus 5 November 2013
Vitesse du noyau	1350 MHz versus 947 MHz
Taux de remplissage de la texture	95.04 GTexel/s versus 151.5 GTexel / s
Processus de fabrication	12 nm versus 28 nm
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	50 Watt versus 275 Watt
Référence
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	152.235 versus 89.325
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	1843.045 versus 1366.314
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	10.681 versus 10.034
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	115.607 versus 98.765
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	644.098 versus 540.645
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	12180 versus 6300
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	8926 versus 3711
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	8062 versus 3354
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	12180 versus 6300
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	8926 versus 3711
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	8062 versus 3354

Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 290

2.5x plus de pipelines: 2560 versus 1024
3.3x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 5000 MHz versus 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective)
Environ 9% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 8210 versus 7539
2x meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 763 versus 380
2.4x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 102277 versus 41907
Environ 1% meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3699 versus 3656

Caractéristiques
Pipelines	2560 versus 1024
Vitesse de mémoire	5000 MHz versus 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective)
Référence
PassMark - G3D Mark	8210 versus 7539
PassMark - G2D Mark	763 versus 380
Geekbench - OpenCL	102277 versus 41907
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	3699 versus 3656

Comparer les références

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 290

PassMark - G3D Mark

GPU 1

GPU 2

7539

8210

PassMark - G2D Mark

GPU 1

GPU 2

380

763

Geekbench - OpenCL

GPU 1

GPU 2

41907

102277

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

152.235

89.325

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

1843.045

1366.314

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

10.681

10.034

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

115.607

98.765

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

644.098

540.645

GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)

GPU 1

GPU 2

12180

6300

GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)

GPU 1

GPU 2

8926

3711

GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)

GPU 1

GPU 2

8062

3354

GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)

GPU 1

GPU 2

12180

6300

GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)

GPU 1

GPU 2

8926

3711

GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)

GPU 1

GPU 2

8062

3354

3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score

GPU 1

GPU 2

3656

3699

Nom	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti	AMD Radeon R9 290
PassMark - G3D Mark	7539	8210
PassMark - G2D Mark	380	763
Geekbench - OpenCL	41907	102277
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	152.235	89.325
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	1843.045	1366.314
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	10.681	10.034
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	115.607	98.765
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	644.098	540.645
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	12180	6300
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	8926	3711
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	8062	3354
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	12180	6300
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	8926	3711
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	8062	3354
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	3656	3699

Comparer les caractéristiques

	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti	AMD Radeon R9 290
Essentiel
Architecture	Turing	GCN 2.0
Nom de code	TU117	Hawaii
Date de sortie	2 Apr 2020	5 November 2013
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance	267	339
Genre	Laptop	Desktop
Conception		AMD Radeon R9 200 Series
Prix de sortie (MSRP)		$399
Infos techniques
Vitesse augmenté	1485 MHz
Vitesse du noyau	1350 MHz	947 MHz
Processus de fabrication	12 nm	28 nm
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance	95.04 GFLOPS (1:32)
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance	6.083 TFLOPS (2:1)
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance	3.041 TFLOPS
Pipelines	1024	2560
Pixel fill rate	47.52 GPixel/s
Taux de remplissage de la texture	95.04 GTexel/s	151.5 GTexel / s
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	50 Watt	275 Watt
Compte de transistor	4700 million	6,200 million
Performance á point flottant		4,849 gflops
Sorties et ports de vidéo
Connecteurs d’écran	No outputs	2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
VGA
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires	None	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
Longeur		275 mm
Soutien API
DirectX	12.1	12
OpenCL	1.2
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Shader Model	6.5
Vulkan
Mémoire
RAM maximale	4 GB	4 GB
Bande passante de la mémoire	192.0 GB/s	320.0 GB / s
Largeur du bus mémoire	128 bit	512 Bit
Vitesse de mémoire	1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective)	5000 MHz
Genre de mémoire	GDDR6	GDDR5
Technologies
HD3D
LiquidVR
TressFX
TrueAudio
Unified Video Decoder (UVD)