NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 versus NVIDIA Quadro P3000
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 and NVIDIA Quadro P3000 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 3 mois plus tard
- Environ 36% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1485 MHz versus 1088 MHz
- Environ 37% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1665 MHz versus 1215 MHz
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 12 nm versus 16 nm
- Environ 14% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 8000 MHz versus 7008 MHz
- Environ 24% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 7881 versus 6366
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 564 versus 404
- Environ 51% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 39165 versus 25862
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 10959 versus 9579
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 10959 versus 9579
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 30 April 2019 versus 11 January 2017 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1485 MHz versus 1088 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1665 MHz versus 1215 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 12 nm versus 16 nm |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 8000 MHz versus 7008 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7881 versus 6366 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 564 versus 404 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 39165 versus 25862 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10959 versus 9579 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10959 versus 9579 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro P3000
- 11.4x meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3489 versus 305
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3720 versus 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3360 versus 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3720 versus 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3360 versus 3358 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3489 versus 305 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro P3000
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| 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 Quadro P3000 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7881 | 6366 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 564 | 404 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 39165 | 25862 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 134.765 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1316.075 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 8.799 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 94.915 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 573.418 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10959 | 9579 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 | 3720 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3360 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10959 | 9579 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 | 3720 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3360 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 305 | 3489 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 | NVIDIA Quadro P3000 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Turing | Pascal |
| Nom de code | TU107 | N17E-Q1 |
| Date de sortie | 30 April 2019 | 11 January 2017 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $179 | |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 376 | 377 |
| Genre | Desktop | Workstation |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1665 MHz | 1215 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1485 MHz | 1088 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 12 nm | 16 nm |
| Pipelines | 1280 | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | |
| Compte DisplayPort | 1 | |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Display Port | 1.4 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | |
Mémoire |
||
| Vitesse de mémoire | 8000 MHz | 7008 MHz |
| RAM maximale | 6 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 168 GB / s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 192 Bit | |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Stereo | ||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView | ||
| nView Display Management | ||
| Optimus | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
ATIRadeon HD 4810
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 980
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
NVIDIATesla M6
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
NVIDIAQuadro P3000
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
NVIDIAQuadro T1000 Max-Q
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
NVIDIATesla K80
