NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB 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 RTX 2070
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 2 mois plus tard
- Environ 80% de pipelines plus haut: 2304 versus 1280
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 12 nm versus 16 nm
- Environ 75% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 14000 MHz versus 8008 MHz
- Environ 60% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 16112 versus 10079
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 819 versus 747
- 2.5x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 88096 versus 35369
- 2.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 251.703 versus 119.148
- 2.7x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 3742.063 versus 1373.562
- 3.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 27.153 versus 8.694
- 7x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 153.341 versus 21.766
- 2.9x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 1304.365 versus 454.799
- Environ 82% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 22615 versus 12442
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3718 versus 3691
- Environ 82% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 22615 versus 12442
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3718 versus 3691
- Environ 73% meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1569 versus 907
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 17 October 2018 versus 19 July 2016 |
| Pipelines | 2304 versus 1280 |
| Processus de fabrication | 12 nm versus 16 nm |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 14000 MHz versus 8008 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 16112 versus 10079 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 819 versus 747 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 88096 versus 35369 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 251.703 versus 119.148 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3742.063 versus 1373.562 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 27.153 versus 8.694 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 153.341 versus 21.766 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1304.365 versus 454.799 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 22615 versus 12442 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3718 versus 3691 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3350 versus 3340 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 22615 versus 12442 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3718 versus 3691 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3350 versus 3340 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1569 versus 907 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB
- Environ 7% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1506 MHz versus 1410 MHz
- Environ 5% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1709 MHz versus 1620 MHz
- Environ 46% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 120 Watt versus 175 Watt
| Vitesse du noyau | 1506 MHz versus 1410 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1709 MHz versus 1620 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 120 Watt versus 175 Watt |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB
| 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 RTX 2070 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 16112 | 10079 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 819 | 747 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 88096 | 35369 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 251.703 | 119.148 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3742.063 | 1373.562 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 27.153 | 8.694 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 153.341 | 21.766 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1304.365 | 454.799 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 22615 | 12442 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3718 | 3691 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3350 | 3340 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 22615 | 12442 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3718 | 3691 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3350 | 3340 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1569 | 907 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Turing | Pascal |
| Nom de code | TU106 | GP106 |
| Date de sortie | 17 October 2018 | 19 July 2016 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $499 | $299 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 151 | 356 |
| Prix maintenant | $499.99 | |
| Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 42.76 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1620 MHz | 1709 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1410 MHz | 1506 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 12 nm | 16 nm |
| Pipelines | 2304 | 1280 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 175 Watt | 120 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 10,800 million | 4,400 million |
| Performance á point flottant | 4,375 gflops | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 136.7 GTexel / s | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 229 mm | 250 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Mémoire |
||
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 256 Bit | 192 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 14000 MHz | 8008 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| RAM maximale | 6 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 192.2 GB / s | |

