NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti versus AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Liquid Cooling
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti and AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Liquid Cooling 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 2 ans 7 mois plus tard
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 12 nm versus 14 nm
- 6.9x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 50 Watt versus 345 Watt
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 8926 versus 3723
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 8062 versus 3362
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 8926 versus 3723
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 8062 versus 3362
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 2 Apr 2020 versus 7 August 2017 |
| Processus de fabrication | 12 nm versus 14 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt versus 345 Watt |
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 8926 versus 3723 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 8062 versus 3362 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 8926 versus 3723 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 8062 versus 3362 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Liquid Cooling
- Environ 4% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1406 MHz versus 1350 MHz
- Environ 13% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1677 MHz versus 1485 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 429.30 GTexel/s versus 95.04 GTexel/s
- 4x plus de pipelines: 4096 versus 1024
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 8 GB versus 4 GB
- Environ 26% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 1890 MHz versus 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective)
- Environ 59% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 19324 versus 12180
- Environ 59% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 19324 versus 12180
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1406 MHz versus 1350 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1677 MHz versus 1485 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 429.30 GTexel/s versus 95.04 GTexel/s |
| Pipelines | 4096 versus 1024 |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 8 GB versus 4 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1890 MHz versus 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective) |
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 19324 versus 12180 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 19324 versus 12180 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
GPU 2: AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Liquid Cooling
| 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 Ti | AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Liquid Cooling |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7567 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 388 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 41946 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 151.899 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1844.67 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 10.683 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 115.919 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 644.054 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12180 | 19324 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 8926 | 3723 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 8062 | 3362 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12180 | 19324 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 8926 | 3723 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 8062 | 3362 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3665 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Liquid Cooling | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Turing | GCN 5.0 |
| Nom de code | TU117 | Vega 10 |
| Date de sortie | 2 Apr 2020 | 7 August 2017 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 273 | 208 |
| Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
| Conception | Radeon RX Vega Series | |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $699 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1485 MHz | 1677 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1350 MHz | 1406 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 12 nm | 14 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 95.04 GFLOPS (1:32) | 840 GFLOPs |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 6.083 TFLOPS (2:1) | 26.7 TFLOPs |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 3.041 TFLOPS | 13.4 TFLOPs |
| Pipelines | 1024 | 4096 |
| Pixel fill rate | 47.52 GPixel/s | 107.30 GP/s |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 95.04 GTexel/s | 429.30 GTexel/s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 345 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 4700 million | 12,500 million |
| Unités de Compute | 64 | |
| Performance á point flottant | 13.7 TFLOPs | |
| Render output units | 64 | |
| Stream Processors | 4096 | |
| Texture Units | 256 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 2x 8-pin |
| Longeur | 282 mm | |
| Énergie du systeme recommandé (PSU) | 1000 Watt | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 2.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 8 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 192.0 GB/s | 483.8 GB/s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | 2048 bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective) | 1890 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | HBM2 |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| AMD Radeon™ Chill | ||
| AMD Radeon™ ReLive | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| LiquidVR | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| TressFX | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
| Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
| Virtual Super Resolution (VSR) | ||
| ZeroCore | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs
AMDRadeon R9 M485X
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1060 Mobile 6 GB
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs
NVIDIAQuadro P4000
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs
AMDRadeon RX 560X Mobile
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs
AMDRadeon Pro 5600M
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs
AMDRadeon Pro W6600M
