NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti versus NVIDIA Quadro P2200
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti and NVIDIA Quadro P2200 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 Ti
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 9 mois plus tard
- Environ 35% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1350 MHz versus 1000 MHz
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 12 nm versus 16 nm
- Environ 50% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 50 Watt versus 75 Watt
- Environ 33% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 41946 versus 31480
- Environ 25% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 151.899 versus 121.124
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 10.683 versus 8.452
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 644.054 versus 510.941
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 12180 versus 11437
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 8926 versus 3717
- 4.8x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 8062 versus 1676
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 12180 versus 11437
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 8926 versus 3717
- 4.8x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 8062 versus 1676
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3666 versus 3404
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 2 Apr 2020 versus 10 June 2019 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1350 MHz versus 1000 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 12 nm versus 16 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt versus 75 Watt |
| Référence | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 41946 versus 31480 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 151.899 versus 121.124 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 10.683 versus 8.452 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 644.054 versus 510.941 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12180 versus 11437 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 8926 versus 3717 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 8062 versus 1676 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12180 versus 11437 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 8926 versus 3717 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 8062 versus 1676 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3666 versus 3404 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro P2200
- Environ 1% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1493 MHz versus 1485 MHz
- Environ 26% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 119.4 GTexel/s versus 95.04 GTexel/s
- Environ 25% de pipelines plus haut: 1280 versus 1024
- Environ 25% plus de taille maximale de mémoire: 5 GB versus 4 GB
- Environ 23% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 9324 versus 7568
- 2.4x meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 918 versus 388
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1958.592 versus 1844.67
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 120.742 versus 115.919
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1493 MHz versus 1485 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 119.4 GTexel/s versus 95.04 GTexel/s |
| Pipelines | 1280 versus 1024 |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 5 GB versus 4 GB |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 9324 versus 7568 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 918 versus 388 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1958.592 versus 1844.67 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 120.742 versus 115.919 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro P2200
| 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 Quadro P2200 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7568 | 9324 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 388 | 918 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 41946 | 31480 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 151.899 | 121.124 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1844.67 | 1958.592 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 10.683 | 8.452 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 115.919 | 120.742 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 644.054 | 510.941 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12180 | 11437 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 8926 | 3717 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 8062 | 1676 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12180 | 11437 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 8926 | 3717 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 8062 | 1676 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3666 | 3404 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | NVIDIA Quadro P2200 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Turing | Pascal |
| Nom de code | TU117 | GP106 |
| Date de sortie | 2 Apr 2020 | 10 June 2019 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 273 | 304 |
| Genre | Laptop | Workstation |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1485 MHz | 1493 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1350 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 12 nm | 16 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 95.04 GFLOPS (1:32) | 119.4 GFLOPS |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 6.083 TFLOPS (2:1) | 59.72 GFLOPS |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 3.041 TFLOPS | 3.822 TFLOPS |
| Pipelines | 1024 | 1280 |
| Pixel fill rate | 47.52 GPixel/s | 59.72 GPixel/s |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 95.04 GTexel/s | 119.4 GTexel/s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 4700 million | 4400 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 4x DisplayPort |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
| Longeur | 201 mm (7.9") | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | 6.4 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 5 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 192.0 GB/s | 200.2 GB/s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | 160 bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective) | |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | GDDR5X |
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
