NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 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 4 ans 7 mois plus tard
- Environ 41% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1485 MHz versus 1050 MHz
- Environ 41% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1665 MHz versus 1178 MHz
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 12 nm versus 28 nm
- 1142.9x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 8000 MHz versus 7.0 GB/s
- Environ 46% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 39405 versus 27020
- Environ 28% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 134.955 versus 105.107
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1294.279 versus 1225.96
- 2.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 91.78 versus 35.714
- Environ 16% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 569.916 versus 489.884
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 versus 3340
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 versus 3340
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 30 April 2019 versus 19 September 2014 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1485 MHz versus 1050 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1665 MHz versus 1178 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 12 nm versus 28 nm |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 8000 MHz versus 7.0 GB/s |
| Référence | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 39405 versus 27020 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 134.955 versus 105.107 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1294.279 versus 1225.96 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 91.78 versus 35.714 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 569.916 versus 489.884 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 versus 3698 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 3340 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 versus 3698 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 3340 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 9646 versus 7877
- Environ 34% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 773 versus 576
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 11499 versus 10959
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 11499 versus 10959
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3622 versus 3597
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 9646 versus 7877 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 773 versus 576 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 8.76 versus 8.756 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 11499 versus 10959 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 11499 versus 10959 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3622 versus 3597 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
| 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 970 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7877 | 9646 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 576 | 773 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 39405 | 27020 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 134.955 | 105.107 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1294.279 | 1225.96 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 8.756 | 8.76 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 91.78 | 35.714 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 569.916 | 489.884 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10959 | 11499 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 | 3698 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3340 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10959 | 11499 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 | 3698 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3340 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3597 | 3622 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Turing | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Nom de code | TU107 | GM204 |
| Date de sortie | 30 April 2019 | 19 September 2014 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $179 | $329 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 359 | 357 |
| Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
| Prix maintenant | $407.76 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 28.59 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1665 MHz | 1178 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1485 MHz | 1050 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Noyaux CUDA | 1664 | |
| Performance á point flottant | 3,920 gflops | |
| Température maximale du GPU | 98 °C | |
| Pipelines | 1664 | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 109 billion / sec | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 148 Watt | |
| Compte de transistor | 5,200 million | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort, Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 |
| 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 | 2x 6-pins |
| Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Hauteur | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
| Longeur | 10.5" (26.7 cm) | |
| Énergie du systeme recommandé (PSU) | 500 Watt | |
| Options SLI | 4x | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
Mémoire |
||
| Vitesse de mémoire | 8000 MHz | 7.0 GB/s |
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 224 GB / s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 256 Bit | |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision | ||
| Adaptive Vertical Sync | ||
| CUDA | ||
| GameStream | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| SLI | ||
| Surround | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
NVIDIAQuadro K6000
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
AMDFirePro S9050
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 980
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 970
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
NVIDIATesla M6
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
AMDRadeon Pro Vega 16
