NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti 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 RTX A2000 Mobile
- Environ 22% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1815 MHz versus 1485 MHz
- Environ 53% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 145.2 GTexel/s versus 95.04 GTexel/s
- 2.5x plus de pipelines: 2560 versus 1024
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 8 nm versus 12 nm
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 9812 versus 7535
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 493 versus 381
- Environ 35% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 56691 versus 42062
- Environ 33% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 202.984 versus 152.235
- Environ 16% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 2138.158 versus 1843.045
- Environ 54% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 16.498 versus 10.681
- Environ 31% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 151.433 versus 115.607
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 729.947 versus 644.098
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 12750 versus 12180
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 12750 versus 12180
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1815 MHz versus 1485 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 145.2 GTexel/s versus 95.04 GTexel/s |
| Pipelines | 2560 versus 1024 |
| Processus de fabrication | 8 nm versus 12 nm |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 9812 versus 7535 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 493 versus 381 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 56691 versus 42062 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 202.984 versus 152.235 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2138.158 versus 1843.045 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 16.498 versus 10.681 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 151.433 versus 115.607 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 729.947 versus 644.098 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12750 versus 12180 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12750 versus 12180 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
- Environ 84% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1350 MHz versus 735 MHz
- Environ 90% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 50 Watt versus 95 Watt
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 8926 versus 3708
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 8062 versus 3355
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 8926 versus 3708
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 8062 versus 3355
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1350 MHz versus 735 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt versus 95 Watt |
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 8926 versus 3708 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 8062 versus 3355 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 8926 versus 3708 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 8062 versus 3355 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
| 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 RTX A2000 Mobile | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 9812 | 7535 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 493 | 381 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 56691 | 42062 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 202.984 | 152.235 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2138.158 | 1843.045 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 16.498 | 10.681 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 151.433 | 115.607 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 729.947 | 644.098 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12750 | 12180 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3708 | 8926 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 | 8062 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12750 | 12180 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3708 | 8926 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 | 8062 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3656 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Ampere | Turing |
| Nom de code | GA106 | TU117 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 272 | 269 |
| Date de sortie | 2 Apr 2020 | |
| Genre | Laptop | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1815 MHz | 1485 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 735 MHz | 1350 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 8 nm | 12 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 145.2 GFLOPS (1:64) | 95.04 GFLOPS (1:32) |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 9.293 TFLOPS (1:1) | 6.083 TFLOPS (2:1) |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 9.293 TFLOPS | 3.041 TFLOPS |
| Pipelines | 2560 | 1024 |
| Pixel fill rate | 87.12 GPixel/s | 47.52 GPixel/s |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 145.2 GTexel/s | 95.04 GTexel/s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 95 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 13250 million | 4700 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.2 | 12.1 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.6 | 6.5 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 192 GB/s | 192.0 GB/s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | 128 bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) | 1500 MHz (12000 MHz effective) |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile avec des autres
NVIDIARTX A2000 Mobile vs
AMDRadeon HD 6610M
NVIDIARTX A2000 Mobile vs
NVIDIAQuadro P3200 Max-Q
NVIDIARTX A2000 Mobile vs
NVIDIATesla V100 SXM2 32 GB
NVIDIARTX A2000 Mobile vs
NVIDIATesla T4
NVIDIARTX A2000 Mobile vs
NVIDIAQuadro P5200
NVIDIARTX A2000 Mobile vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti
