NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti versus NVIDIA Tesla T4
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti and NVIDIA Tesla T4 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 1 ans 6 mois plus tard
- Environ 34% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1350 MHz versus 1005 MHz
- Environ 50% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 50 Watt versus 75 Watt
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 152.235 versus 127.622
- 4.5x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 8926 versus 1976
- 4.5x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 8062 versus 1781
- 4.5x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 8926 versus 1976
- 4.5x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 8062 versus 1781
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 2 Apr 2020 versus 13 September 2018 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1350 MHz versus 1005 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt versus 75 Watt |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 152.235 versus 127.622 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 8926 versus 1976 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 8062 versus 1781 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 8926 versus 1976 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 8062 versus 1781 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Tesla T4
- Environ 2% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1515 MHz versus 1485 MHz
- 6.7x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 10000 MHz versus 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective)
- Environ 42% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 10684 versus 7542
- Environ 55% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 592 versus 383
- Environ 46% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 61276 versus 42000
- Environ 64% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 3026.812 versus 1843.045
- Environ 76% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 18.798 versus 10.681
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 119.936 versus 115.607
- Environ 41% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 910.721 versus 644.098
- Environ 16% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 14076 versus 12180
- Environ 16% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 14076 versus 12180
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1515 MHz versus 1485 MHz |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 10000 MHz versus 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective) |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 10684 versus 7542 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 592 versus 383 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 61276 versus 42000 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3026.812 versus 1843.045 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 18.798 versus 10.681 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 119.936 versus 115.607 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 910.721 versus 644.098 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 14076 versus 12180 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 14076 versus 12180 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
GPU 2: NVIDIA Tesla T4
| 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) |
|
|
| Nom | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | NVIDIA Tesla T4 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7542 | 10684 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 383 | 592 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 42000 | 61276 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 152.235 | 127.622 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1843.045 | 3026.812 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 10.681 | 18.798 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 115.607 | 119.936 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 644.098 | 910.721 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12180 | 14076 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 8926 | 1976 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 8062 | 1781 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12180 | 14076 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 8926 | 1976 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 8062 | 1781 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3656 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | NVIDIA Tesla T4 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Turing | Turing |
| Nom de code | TU117 | TU104 |
| Date de sortie | 2 Apr 2020 | 13 September 2018 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 270 | 272 |
| Genre | Laptop | Workstation |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1485 MHz | 1515 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1350 MHz | 1005 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 12 nm | 12 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 | |
| Pixel fill rate | 47.52 GPixel/s | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 95.04 GTexel/s | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 4700 million | 13,600 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 192.0 GB/s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective) | 10000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | |
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs
AMDRadeon R9 390X
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs
NVIDIATesla V100 SXM2 32 GB
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs
NVIDIATesla T4
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs
NVIDIAQuadro P5200
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop)
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs
AMDRadeon RX 6400
