NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti versus AMD Radeon PRO WX 9100
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti and AMD Radeon PRO WX 9100 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 1660 Ti
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 7 mois plus tard
- Environ 25% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1500 MHz versus 1200 MHz
- Environ 18% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1770 MHz versus 1500 MHz
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 12 nm versus 14 nm
- Environ 92% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 120 Watt versus 230 Watt
- 6.3x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 12000 MHz versus 1890 MHz
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 12931 versus 12844
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 813 versus 769
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 208.608 versus 174.714
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 16952 versus 13848
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3718 versus 3680
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3355 versus 3336
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 16952 versus 13848
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3718 versus 3680
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3355 versus 3336
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 22 February 2019 versus 10 July 2017 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1500 MHz versus 1200 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1770 MHz versus 1500 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 12 nm versus 14 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 120 Watt versus 230 Watt |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 12000 MHz versus 1890 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 12931 versus 12844 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 813 versus 769 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 208.608 versus 174.714 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 16952 versus 13848 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3718 versus 3680 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 versus 3336 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 16952 versus 13848 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3718 versus 3680 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 versus 3336 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon PRO WX 9100
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 64683 versus 61445
- Environ 53% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 3924.968 versus 2573.643
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 17.305 versus 16.447
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 175.219 versus 145.886
- Environ 32% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 1226.861 versus 926.614
| Référence | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 64683 versus 61445 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3924.968 versus 2573.643 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 17.305 versus 16.447 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 175.219 versus 145.886 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1226.861 versus 926.614 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
GPU 2: AMD Radeon PRO WX 9100
| 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 1660 Ti | AMD Radeon PRO WX 9100 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 12931 | 12844 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 813 | 769 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 61445 | 64683 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 208.608 | 174.714 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2573.643 | 3924.968 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 16.447 | 17.305 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 145.886 | 175.219 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 926.614 | 1226.861 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 16952 | 13848 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3718 | 3680 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 | 3336 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 16952 | 13848 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3718 | 3680 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 | 3336 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 6260 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti | AMD Radeon PRO WX 9100 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Turing | GCN 5.0 |
| Nom de code | TU116 | Vega 10 |
| Date de sortie | 22 February 2019 | 10 July 2017 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $279 | $1,599 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 200 | 196 |
| Prix maintenant | $279.99 | |
| Genre | Desktop | Workstation |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 67.32 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1770 MHz | 1500 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1500 MHz | 1200 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 12 nm | 14 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 120 Watt | 230 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 6,600 million | 12,500 million |
| Performance á point flottant | 12,288 gflops | |
| Pipelines | 4096 | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 384.0 GTexel / s | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 6x mini-DisplayPort |
| Compte DisplayPort | 1 | |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| HDMI | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 229 mm | 267 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Mémoire |
||
| Vitesse de mémoire | 12000 MHz | 1890 MHz |
| RAM maximale | 16 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 483.8 GB / s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 2048 Bit | |
| Genre de mémoire | HBM2 | |
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1660 Ti vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 4500 X2
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1660 Ti vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1080 Ti (Desktop)
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1660 Ti vs
AMDRadeon Vega Frontier Edition
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1660 Ti vs
NVIDIAGeForce RTX 2080 SUPER Mobile
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1660 Ti vs
AppleA14 Bionic
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1660 Ti vs
AMDRadeon 780M
