Intel UHD Graphics 630 versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)
Comparaison des cartes vidéo Intel UHD Graphics 630 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) 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 Intel UHD Graphics 630
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 10 mois plus tard
- 5x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 15 Watt versus 75 Watt
| Date de sortie | 1 September 2017 versus 25 October 2016 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt versus 75 Watt |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)
- 4x plus de vitesse du noyau: 1392 MHz versus 350 MHz
- Environ 16% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1392 MHz versus 1200 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 66.82 GTexel / s versus 28.8 GTexel / s
- 32x plus de pipelines: 768 versus 24
- 4.6x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2,138 gflops versus 460.8 gflops
- 5.1x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 6332 versus 1237
- 2.2x meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 650 versus 299
- 4.5x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 20732 versus 4657
- 2.8x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 75.758 versus 27.517
- 2.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 843.503 versus 354.254
- 2.8x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.071 versus 1.807
- Environ 21% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 24.676 versus 20.323
- 10.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 301.168 versus 29.327
- 4.5x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8496 versus 1870
- 2.3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3687 versus 1596
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3336 versus 3309
- 4.5x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8496 versus 1870
- 2.3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3687 versus 1596
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3336 versus 3309
- 4.5x meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 305 versus 68
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1392 MHz versus 350 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1392 MHz versus 1200 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 66.82 GTexel / s versus 28.8 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 768 versus 24 |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,138 gflops versus 460.8 gflops |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6332 versus 1237 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 650 versus 299 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 20732 versus 4657 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 75.758 versus 27.517 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 843.503 versus 354.254 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.071 versus 1.807 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 24.676 versus 20.323 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 301.168 versus 29.327 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8496 versus 1870 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3687 versus 1596 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3336 versus 3309 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8496 versus 1870 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3687 versus 1596 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3336 versus 3309 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 305 versus 68 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: Intel UHD Graphics 630
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop)
| 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 | Intel UHD Graphics 630 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1237 | 6332 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 299 | 650 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 4657 | 20732 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 27.517 | 75.758 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 354.254 | 843.503 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.807 | 5.071 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 20.323 | 24.676 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 29.327 | 301.168 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1870 | 8496 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1596 | 3687 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3309 | 3336 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1870 | 8496 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1596 | 3687 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3309 | 3336 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 68 | 305 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| Intel UHD Graphics 630 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Generation 9.5 | Pascal |
| Nom de code | Coffee Lake GT2 | GP107 |
| Date de sortie | 1 September 2017 | 25 October 2016 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1234 | 487 |
| Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $139 | |
| Prix maintenant | $159.99 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 46.07 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1200 MHz | 1392 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 350 MHz | 1392 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 460.8 gflops | 2,138 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Pipelines | 24 | 768 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 28.8 GTexel / s | 66.82 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 189 million | 3,300 million |
| Noyaux CUDA | 768 | |
| Température maximale du GPU | 97 °C | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| Soutien de G-SYNC | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 145 mm | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 / 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Mémoire partagé | 1 | 0 |
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 112 GB / s | |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 7 GB/s | |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
| 3D Vision | ||
| Ansel | ||
| CUDA | ||
| Multi Monitor | ||
| Multi-Projection | ||
| VR Ready | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer Intel UHD Graphics 630 avec des autres
IntelUHD Graphics 630 vs
ATIRadeon 9200 PRO
IntelUHD Graphics 630 vs
AMDRadeon HD 6550D
IntelUHD Graphics 630 vs
AMDRadeon R7 240
IntelUHD Graphics 630 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 840M
IntelUHD Graphics 630 vs
IntelUHD Graphics 617
IntelUHD Graphics 630 vs
AMDRadeon 680M
