NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q 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 RTX 2070
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 3 mois plus tard
- Environ 16% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1410 MHz versus 1215 MHz
- Environ 17% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1620 MHz versus 1379 MHz
- Environ 13% de pipelines plus haut: 2304 versus 2048
- 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 64% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 16174 versus 9884
- Environ 89% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 824 versus 437
- 2.3x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 87137 versus 37928
- Environ 18% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 252.062 versus 214.123
- Environ 63% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 3729.447 versus 2293.496
- 2.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 27.133 versus 12.704
- Environ 11% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 154.621 versus 139.717
- Environ 88% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 1303.435 versus 692.9
- Environ 52% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 22615 versus 14915
- Environ 52% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 22615 versus 14915
- Environ 82% meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 8871 versus 4887
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 17 October 2018 versus 27 June 2017 |
Vitesse du noyau | 1410 MHz versus 1215 MHz |
Vitesse augmenté | 1620 MHz versus 1379 MHz |
Pipelines | 2304 versus 2048 |
Processus de fabrication | 12 nm versus 16 nm |
Vitesse de mémoire | 14000 MHz versus 8008 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 16174 versus 9884 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 824 versus 437 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 87137 versus 37928 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 252.062 versus 214.123 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3729.447 versus 2293.496 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 27.133 versus 12.704 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 154.621 versus 139.717 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1303.435 versus 692.9 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 22615 versus 14915 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 22615 versus 14915 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 8871 versus 4887 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
- Environ 52% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 115 Watt versus 175 Watt
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 8902 versus 3718
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 8048 versus 3350
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 8902 versus 3718
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 8048 versus 3350
Caractéristiques | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 115 Watt versus 175 Watt |
Référence | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 8902 versus 3718 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 8048 versus 3350 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 8902 versus 3718 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 8048 versus 3350 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q
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 1070 Max-Q |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 16174 | 9884 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 824 | 437 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 87137 | 37928 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 252.062 | 214.123 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3729.447 | 2293.496 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 27.133 | 12.704 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 154.621 | 139.717 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1303.435 | 692.9 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 22615 | 14915 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3718 | 8902 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3350 | 8048 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 22615 | 14915 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3718 | 8902 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3350 | 8048 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 8871 | 4887 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Turing | Pascal |
Nom de code | TU106 | GP104 |
Date de sortie | 17 October 2018 | 27 June 2017 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $499 | |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 140 | 221 |
Prix maintenant | $499.99 | |
Genre | Desktop | Laptop |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 42.76 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1620 MHz | 1379 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 1410 MHz | 1215 MHz |
Processus de fabrication | 12 nm | 16 nm |
Pipelines | 2304 | 2048 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 175 Watt | 115 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 10,800 million | 7,200 million |
Performance á point flottant | 5,648 gflops | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 176.5 GTexel / s | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C | No outputs |
Soutien de G-SYNC | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Longeur | 229 mm | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 8-pin | None |
Taille du laptop | large | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (12_1) |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
Largeur du bus mémoire | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 14000 MHz | 8008 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
RAM maximale | 8 GB | |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 256.3 GB / s | |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
Multi Monitor | ||
Multi-Projection | ||
VR Ready |