NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 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 6 ans 11 mois plus tard
- Environ 52% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1485 MHz versus 980 MHz
- Environ 70% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1665 MHz versus 980 MHz
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 12 nm versus 28 nm
- 1333.3x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 8000 MHz versus 6.0 GB/s
- Environ 47% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 7881 versus 5345
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 564 versus 537
- 2.5x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 39165 versus 15511
- 3.2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 134.765 versus 41.613
- Environ 36% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1316.075 versus 971.208
- 2.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 8.799 versus 4.281
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 94.915 versus 40.404
- 6.7x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 573.418 versus 86.208
- Environ 56% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 10959 versus 7038
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3715 versus 3686
- Environ 56% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 10959 versus 7038
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3715 versus 3686
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 30 April 2019 versus 10 May 2012 |
Vitesse du noyau | 1485 MHz versus 980 MHz |
Vitesse augmenté | 1665 MHz versus 980 MHz |
Processus de fabrication | 12 nm versus 28 nm |
Vitesse de mémoire | 8000 MHz versus 6.0 GB/s |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 7881 versus 5345 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 564 versus 537 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 39165 versus 15511 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 134.765 versus 41.613 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1316.075 versus 971.208 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 8.799 versus 4.281 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 94.915 versus 40.404 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 573.418 versus 86.208 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10959 versus 7038 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 versus 3686 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10959 versus 7038 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 versus 3686 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670
- 6x meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1839 versus 305
Référence | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3361 versus 3358 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3361 versus 3358 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1839 versus 305 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670
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 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 7881 | 5345 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 564 | 537 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 39165 | 15511 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 134.765 | 41.613 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1316.075 | 971.208 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 8.799 | 4.281 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 94.915 | 40.404 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 573.418 | 86.208 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10959 | 7038 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 | 3686 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3361 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10959 | 7038 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 | 3686 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3361 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 305 | 1839 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Turing | Kepler |
Nom de code | TU107 | GK104 |
Date de sortie | 30 April 2019 | 10 May 2012 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $179 | $399 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 376 | 554 |
Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
Prix maintenant | $474.99 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 13.20 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1665 MHz | 980 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 1485 MHz | 980 MHz |
Processus de fabrication | 12 nm | 28 nm |
Noyaux CUDA | 1344 | |
Performance á point flottant | 2,459.5 gflops | |
Température maximale du GPU | 97 °C | |
Pipelines | 1344 | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 102.5 billion / sec | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 170 Watt | |
Compte de transistor | 3,540 million | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI..., 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
Compte DisplayPort | 1 | |
Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
HDMI | ||
Contribution d’audio pour HDMI | Internal | |
Soutien de G-SYNC | ||
HDCP | ||
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 | Two 6-pin |
Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0 | |
Hauteur | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
Longeur | 9.5" (24.1 cm) | |
Options SLI | 3-way | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.2 |
Mémoire |
||
Vitesse de mémoire | 8000 MHz | 6.0 GB/s |
RAM maximale | 2 GB | |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 192.2 GB / s | |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 256-bit GDDR5 | |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Blu-Ray | ||
3D Gaming | ||
3D Vision | ||
Adaptive VSync | ||
CUDA | ||
FXAA | ||
GPU Boost | ||
SLI | ||
TXAA |