NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 versus AMD Radeon RX 580
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 and AMD Radeon RX 580 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
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 0 mois plus tard
- Environ 18% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1485 MHz versus 1257 MHz
- Environ 24% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1665 MHz versus 1340 MHz
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 12 nm versus 14 nm
- Environ 16% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 134.765 versus 116.142
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1316.075 versus 1022.932
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 94.915 versus 84.034
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3715 versus 3695
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3715 versus 3695
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 30 April 2019 versus 18 April 2017 |
Vitesse du noyau | 1485 MHz versus 1257 MHz |
Vitesse augmenté | 1665 MHz versus 1340 MHz |
Processus de fabrication | 12 nm versus 14 nm |
Référence | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 39165 versus 39028 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 134.765 versus 116.142 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1316.075 versus 1022.932 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 94.915 versus 84.034 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 versus 3695 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 3349 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 versus 3695 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 3349 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon RX 580
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 8827 versus 7881
- Environ 36% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 767 versus 564
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 9.235 versus 8.799
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 607.721 versus 573.418
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 11281 versus 10959
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 11281 versus 10959
- 3.3x meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1005 versus 305
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 8827 versus 7881 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 767 versus 564 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 9.235 versus 8.799 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 607.721 versus 573.418 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 11281 versus 10959 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 11281 versus 10959 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1005 versus 305 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
GPU 2: AMD Radeon RX 580
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 | AMD Radeon RX 580 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 7881 | 8827 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 564 | 767 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 39165 | 39028 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 134.765 | 116.142 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1316.075 | 1022.932 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 8.799 | 9.235 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 94.915 | 84.034 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 573.418 | 607.721 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10959 | 11281 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 | 3695 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3349 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10959 | 11281 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 | 3695 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3349 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 305 | 1005 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 | AMD Radeon RX 580 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Turing | GCN 4.0 |
Nom de code | TU107 | Polaris 20 |
Date de sortie | 30 April 2019 | 18 April 2017 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $179 | $229 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 376 | 341 |
Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
Conception | Radeon RX 500 Series | |
Génération GCN | 4th Gen | |
Prix maintenant | $169.99 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 76.21 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1665 MHz | 1340 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 1485 MHz | 1257 MHz |
Processus de fabrication | 12 nm | 14 nm |
Unités de Compute | 36 | |
Performance á point flottant | 6.2 TFLOPs | |
Pipelines | 2304 | |
Pixel fill rate | 42.88 GP/s | |
Render output units | 32 | |
Stream Processors | 2304 | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 192.96 GTexel/s | |
Texture Units | 144 | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 185 Watt | |
Compte de transistor | 5,700 million | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort |
Compte DisplayPort | 1 | |
Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
HDMI | ||
Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 1x 8-pin |
Bridgeless CrossFire | ||
Longeur | 241 mm | |
Énergie du systeme recommandé (PSU) | 500 Watt | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 | 12 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
OpenCL | 2.0 | |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
Vitesse de mémoire | 8000 MHz | 8000 MHz |
RAM maximale | 8 GB | |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 256 GB/s | |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 256 bit | |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | |
Technologies |
||
4K H264 Decode | ||
4K H264 Encode | ||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
AMD Radeon™ Chill | ||
AMD Radeon™ ReLive | ||
AppAcceleration | ||
CrossFire | ||
FreeSync | ||
H265/HEVC Decode | ||
H265/HEVC Encode | ||
HDMI 4K Support | ||
LiquidVR | ||
PowerTune | ||
TrueAudio | ||
Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
Virtual Super Resolution (VSR) | ||
VR Ready |