NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 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 6 ans 1 mois plus tard
- Environ 32% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1350 MHz versus 1020 MHz
- Environ 37% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1485 MHz versus 1085 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 95.04 GTexel/s versus 34.72 GTexel / s
- 2x plus de pipelines: 1024 versus 512
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 12 nm versus 28 nm
- Environ 10% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 50 Watt versus 55 Watt
- 4x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 4 GB versus 1 GB
- 300x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective) versus 5.0 GB/s
- 2.3x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 7539 versus 3337
- 4.5x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 41907 versus 9306
- 4.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 152.235 versus 34.239
- 2.9x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1843.045 versus 639.427
- 4.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 10.681 versus 2.341
- 3.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 115.607 versus 32
- 9.2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 644.098 versus 69.814
- 2.7x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 12180 versus 4498
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 8926 versus 3704
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 8062 versus 3346
- 2.7x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 12180 versus 4498
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 8926 versus 3704
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 8062 versus 3346
- 3.5x meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3656 versus 1050
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 2 Apr 2020 versus 18 February 2014 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1350 MHz versus 1020 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1485 MHz versus 1085 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 95.04 GTexel/s versus 34.72 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1024 versus 512 |
| Processus de fabrication | 12 nm versus 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt versus 55 Watt |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 4 GB versus 1 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective) versus 5.0 GB/s |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7539 versus 3337 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 41907 versus 9306 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 152.235 versus 34.239 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1843.045 versus 639.427 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 10.681 versus 2.341 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 115.607 versus 32 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 644.098 versus 69.814 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12180 versus 4498 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 8926 versus 3704 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 8062 versus 3346 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12180 versus 4498 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 8926 versus 3704 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 8062 versus 3346 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3656 versus 1050 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750
- Environ 36% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 515 versus 380
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 515 versus 380 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750
| 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 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7539 | 3337 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 380 | 515 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 41907 | 9306 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 152.235 | 34.239 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1843.045 | 639.427 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 10.681 | 2.341 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 115.607 | 32 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 644.098 | 69.814 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12180 | 4498 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 8926 | 3704 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 8062 | 3346 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12180 | 4498 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 8926 | 3704 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 8062 | 3346 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3656 | 1050 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Turing | Maxwell |
| Nom de code | TU117 | GM107 |
| Date de sortie | 2 Apr 2020 | 18 February 2014 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 267 | 724 |
| Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $119 | |
| Prix maintenant | $150.99 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 27.54 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1485 MHz | 1085 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1350 MHz | 1020 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 | 512 |
| Pixel fill rate | 47.52 GPixel/s | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 95.04 GTexel/s | 34.72 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 55 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 4700 million | 1,870 million |
| Noyaux CUDA | 512 | |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,111 gflops | |
| Température maximale du GPU | 95 °C | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI, One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One mini... |
| Contribution d’audio pour HDMI | Internal | |
| Soutien de G-SYNC | ||
| HDCP | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Résolution VGA maximale | 2048x1536 | |
| Soutien de plusiers moniteurs | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
| Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Hauteur | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
| Longeur | 5.7" (14.5 cm) | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 1 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 192.0 GB/s | 80 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective) | 5.0 GB/s |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Gaming | ||
| 3D Vision | ||
| 3D Vision Live | ||
| Adaptive VSync | ||
| Blu Ray 3D | ||
| CUDA | ||
| FXAA | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| TXAA | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs
AMDRadeon R7 M380
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs
AMDRadeon R9 390X
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs
AMDRadeon R9 Fury
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs
NVIDIATesla V100 SXM2 32 GB
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs
NVIDIATesla T4
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs
NVIDIAQuadro P5200
