NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti versus AMD Radeon R9 Fury
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti and AMD Radeon R9 Fury 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 1650 Ti
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 4 ans 8 mois plus tard
- Environ 49% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1485 MHz versus 1000 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 95.04 GTexel/s versus 224.0 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
- 3x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective) versus 500 MHz
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 152.235 versus 141.671
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 12180 versus 10116
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 8926 versus 3717
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 8062 versus 3356
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 12180 versus 10116
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 8926 versus 3717
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 8062 versus 3356
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 2 Apr 2020 versus 10 July 2015 |
Vitesse augmenté | 1485 MHz versus 1000 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 95.04 GTexel/s versus 224.0 GTexel / s |
Processus de fabrication | 12 nm versus 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt versus 275 Watt |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective) versus 500 MHz |
Référence | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 152.235 versus 141.671 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12180 versus 10116 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 8926 versus 3717 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 8062 versus 3356 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12180 versus 10116 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 8926 versus 3717 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 8062 versus 3356 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 Fury
- 3.5x plus de pipelines: 3584 versus 1024
- Environ 27% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 9556 versus 7529
- 2.1x meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 789 versus 384
- Environ 27% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 53258 versus 41920
- Environ 95% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 3600.035 versus 1843.045
- Environ 24% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 13.2 versus 10.681
- Environ 15% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 133.144 versus 115.607
- Environ 23% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 791.572 versus 644.098
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 4739 versus 3660
Caractéristiques | |
Pipelines | 3584 versus 1024 |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 9556 versus 7529 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 789 versus 384 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 53258 versus 41920 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3600.035 versus 1843.045 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 13.2 versus 10.681 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 133.144 versus 115.607 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 791.572 versus 644.098 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 4739 versus 3660 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 Fury
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 |
|
|
Nom | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | AMD Radeon R9 Fury |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 7529 | 9556 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 384 | 789 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 41920 | 53258 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 152.235 | 141.671 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1843.045 | 3600.035 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 10.681 | 13.2 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 115.607 | 133.144 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 644.098 | 791.572 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12180 | 10116 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 8926 | 3717 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 8062 | 3356 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12180 | 10116 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 8926 | 3717 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 8062 | 3356 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3660 | 4739 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | AMD Radeon R9 Fury | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Turing | GCN 3.0 |
Nom de code | TU117 | Fiji |
Date de sortie | 2 Apr 2020 | 10 July 2015 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 283 | 281 |
Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
Conception | AMD Radeon R9 Fury Series | |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $549 | |
Prix maintenant | $399.99 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 35.98 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1485 MHz | 1000 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 1350 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 | 3584 |
Pixel fill rate | 47.52 GPixel/s | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 95.04 GTexel/s | 224.0 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 275 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 4700 million | 8,900 million |
Unités de Compute | 56 | |
Performance á point flottant | 7,168 gflops | |
Stream Processors | 3584 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort |
Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
Eyefinity | ||
HDMI | ||
Nombre d’écrans Eyefinity | 6 | |
VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 2x 8-pin |
Bridgeless CrossFire | ||
Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.1 | 12 |
OpenCL | 1.2 | 2.0 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Shader Model | 6.5 | |
Vulkan | ||
Mantle | ||
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 4 GB | 4 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 192.0 GB/s | 512 GB/s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | 4096 bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective) | 500 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | High Bandwidth Memory (HBM) |
Mémoire de la bande passante haute (HBM) | ||
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
AppAcceleration | ||
CrossFire | ||
DDMA audio | ||
FreeSync | ||
FRTC | ||
HD3D | ||
LiquidVR | ||
PowerTune | ||
TressFX | ||
TrueAudio | ||
Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
Virtual Super Resolution (VSR) |