NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM versus AMD Radeon Pro Duo
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM and AMD Radeon Pro Duo 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 - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score, 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).
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 5 ans 8 mois plus tard
- Environ 76% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1755 MHz versus 1000 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 126.4 GTexel/s versus 2x 256.0 GTexel / s billion / sec
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 8 nm versus 28 nm
- 2.7x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 130 Watt versus 350 Watt
- 3.5x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 1750 MHz, 14 Gbps effective versus 500 MHz
- Environ 25% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 958 versus 765
- Environ 47% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 12003 versus 8164
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 60596 versus 53806
- Environ 47% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 207.741 versus 141.474
- Environ 45% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 19.08 versus 13.132
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 806.848 versus 799.933
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 4 Jan 2022 versus 26 April 2016 |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1755 MHz versus 1000 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 126.4 GTexel/s versus 2x 256.0 GTexel / s billion / sec |
| Processus de fabrication | 8 nm versus 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 130 Watt versus 350 Watt |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1750 MHz, 14 Gbps effective versus 500 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 958 versus 765 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 12003 versus 8164 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 60596 versus 53806 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 207.741 versus 141.474 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 19.08 versus 13.132 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 806.848 versus 799.933 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon Pro Duo
- 3.6x plus de pipelines: 2x 4096 versus 2304
- Environ 44% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 3621.344 versus 2522.737
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 112.973 versus 87.152
| Caractéristiques | |
| Pipelines | 2x 4096 versus 2304 |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3621.344 versus 2522.737 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 112.973 versus 87.152 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM
GPU 2: AMD Radeon Pro Duo
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G3D 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) |
|
|
| Nom | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM | AMD Radeon Pro Duo |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 958 | 765 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 12003 | 8164 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 60596 | 53806 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 6261 | 0 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 207.741 | 141.474 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2522.737 | 3621.344 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 19.08 | 13.132 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 87.152 | 112.973 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 806.848 | 799.933 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10141 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3713 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 38251 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10141 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3713 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 38251 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM | AMD Radeon Pro Duo | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Ampere | GCN 3.0 |
| Nom de code | GA106 | Capsaicin |
| Date de sortie | 4 Jan 2022 | 26 April 2016 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 195 | 198 |
| Conception | reference | |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $1,499 | |
| Prix maintenant | $849 | |
| Genre | Workstation | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 17.05 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1755 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1515 MHz | |
| Processus de fabrication | 8 nm | 28 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 126.4 GFLOPS (1:64) | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 8.087 TFLOPS (1:1) | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 8.087 TFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 2304 | 2x 4096 |
| Pixel fill rate | 56.16 GPixel/s | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 126.4 GTexel/s | 2x 256.0 GTexel / s billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 130 Watt | 350 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 12000 million | 8,900 million |
| Unités de Compute | 128 | |
| Performance á point flottant | 2x 8,192 gflops | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Nombre d’écrans Eyefinity | 6 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Facteur de forme | Dual-slot | |
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 242 mm, 9.5 inches | 277 mm |
| Énergie du systeme recommandé (PSU) | 300 Watt | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 8-pin | 3x 8-pin |
| Largeur | 112 mm, 4.4 inches | |
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | DirectX® 12 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 2.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 6.7 | |
| Vulkan | ||
| Mantle | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 8 GB | 8 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 224.0 GB/s | 512 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | 2x 4096 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1750 MHz, 14 Gbps effective | 500 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | High Bandwidth Memory (HBM) |
Technologies |
||
| AppAcceleration | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| Enduro | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| FRTC | ||
| HD3D | ||
| LiquidVR | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| TressFX | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
| Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
| ZeroCore | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce RTX 3050 OEM vs
NVIDIAGRID M6-8Q
NVIDIAGeForce RTX 3050 OEM vs
AMDRadeon Pro Duo
NVIDIAGeForce RTX 3050 OEM vs
NVIDIATesla P100 PCIe 16 GB
NVIDIAGeForce RTX 3050 OEM vs
AMDRadeon Pro Vega 64X
NVIDIAGeForce RTX 3050 OEM vs
AMDRadeon Pro 5300
NVIDIAGeForce RTX 3050 OEM vs
IntelArc Pro A30M
