NVIDIA T400 versus NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA T400 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 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: 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), PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA T400
- Environ 38% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1425 MHz versus 1035 MHz
- 2.5x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 30 Watt versus 75 Watt
| Vitesse augmenté | 1425 MHz versus 1035 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt versus 75 Watt |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti
- Environ 75% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 735 MHz versus 420 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 82.80 GTexel/s versus 34.20 GTexel/s
- 6.7x plus de pipelines: 2560 versus 384
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 8 nm versus 12 nm
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 4 GB versus 2 GB
- Environ 20% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 1500 MHz, 12 Gbps effective versus 1250 MHz, 10 Gbps effective
- 3.4x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 57667 versus 16963
- 3.9x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 227.936 versus 58.805
- 2.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 2031.737 versus 785.059
- 4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 15.93 versus 3.961
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 121.562 versus 53.111
- 2.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 568.183 versus 222.15
- 3.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 16098 versus 5088
- Environ 71% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3717 versus 2173
- 3.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 16098 versus 5088
- Environ 71% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3717 versus 2173
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 735 MHz versus 420 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 82.80 GTexel/s versus 34.20 GTexel/s |
| Pipelines | 2560 versus 384 |
| Processus de fabrication | 8 nm versus 12 nm |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 4 GB versus 2 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1500 MHz, 12 Gbps effective versus 1250 MHz, 10 Gbps effective |
| Référence | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 57667 versus 16963 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 227.936 versus 58.805 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2031.737 versus 785.059 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 15.93 versus 3.961 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 121.562 versus 53.111 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 568.183 versus 222.15 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 16098 versus 5088 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3717 versus 2173 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 3346 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 16098 versus 5088 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3717 versus 2173 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 3346 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA T400
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti
| 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 T400 | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 16963 | 57667 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 58.805 | 227.936 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 785.059 | 2031.737 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.961 | 15.93 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 53.111 | 121.562 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 222.15 | 568.183 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5088 | 16098 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2173 | 3717 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3346 | 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5088 | 16098 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2173 | 3717 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3346 | 3358 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 10143 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 497 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 5425 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA T400 | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Turing | Ampere |
| Nom de code | TU117 | GA106 |
| Date de sortie | 6 May 2021 | 11 May 2021 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 901 | 270 |
| Genre | Laptop | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1425 MHz | 1035 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 420 MHz | 735 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 12 nm | 8 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 34.20 GFLOPS (1:32) | 82.80 GFLOPS (1:64) |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 2.189 TFLOPS (2:1) | 5.299 TFLOPS (1:1) |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 1,094 GFLOPS | 5.299 TFLOPS |
| Pipelines | 384 | 2560 |
| Pixel fill rate | 22.80 GPixel/s | 49.68 GPixel/s |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 34.20 GTexel/s | 82.80 GTexel/s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 4700 million | 12000 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 3x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a | Portable Device Dependent |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Facteur de forme | Single-slot | IGP |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Énergie du systeme recommandé (PSU) | 200 Watt | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.7 (6.4) | 6.7 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 80.00 GB/s | 192.0 GB/s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 bit | 128 bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1250 MHz, 10 Gbps effective | 1500 MHz, 12 Gbps effective |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA T400 avec des autres
NVIDIAT400 vs
NVIDIAGeForce PCX 5300
NVIDIAT400 vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 2600 XT
NVIDIAT400 vs
ATIRadeon HD 4200
NVIDIAT400 vs
NVIDIAGeForce MX110
NVIDIAT400 vs
AMDRadeon Vega 11
NVIDIAT400 vs
NVIDIAGeForce MX250
