Geforce Gt 1030 Vs Gtx 1050
Price at present 290$ Games supported 79% Price now 115$ Games supported 68% Comparison of graphics carte compages, market segment, value for money and other general parameters. Value for money To get the index we compare the characteristics of video cards and their relative prices. General performance parameters such equally number of shaders, GPU core base clock and heave clock speeds, manufacturing procedure, texturing and adding speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise cess you have to consider their criterion and gaming test results. Note that ability consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked. Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a futurity reckoner configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and motorcoach (motherboard compatibility), additional ability connectors (power supply compatibility). Parameters of memory installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Notation that GPUs integrated into processors take no dedicated VRAM and use a shared part of system RAM. Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise merely for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA fries). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself. Supported technological solutions. This information will bear witness useful if y'all need some particular engineering for your purposes. APIs supported, including particular versions of those APIs. Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. Note that overall benchmark functioning is measured in points in 0-100 range. This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if yous detect some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we commonly set bug rapidly. This is probably the nearly ubiquitous criterion, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, ten, 11 and 12 (the terminal being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities. Benchmark coverage: 25% 3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX ten benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with ii scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a ocean cavern, the other displaying a space fleet assault on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead. Benchmark coverage: 17% 3DMark xi is an obsolete DirectX xi benchmark by Futuremark. It used 4 tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken send, the other is an abased temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite existence done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded past Time Spy. Criterion coverage: 17% Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 characteristic level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird infinite teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just similar Ice Storm criterion, information technology has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid. Criterion coverage: 14% Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery animate being seemingly made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Burn down Strike shows off some realistic enough graphics and is quite taxing on hardware. Benchmark coverage: fourteen% Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics bill of fare criterion combined from 11 unlike examination scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Grouping. Criterion coverage: 9% Ice Tempest Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, office of 3DMark suite. Water ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle betwixt two space fleets about a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded past 3DMark Night Raid. Benchmark coverage: 8% Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from xi different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group. Benchmark coverage: five% Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses CUDA API by NVIDIA. Benchmark coverage: 5% Cryptocurrency mining performance of GeForce GTX 1050 and GeForce GT 1030. Usually measured in megahashes per second. Let's run into how practiced the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS. Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games beyond different resolutions: +111% −111% +88.ix% −88.9% +fourscore.6% −fourscore.half-dozen% +47.8% −47.8% +54.v% −54.5% −11.viii% +eleven.8% +78.3% −78.3% −58.8% +58.8% −29.four% +29.four% +13.3% −13.3% +244% −244% +58.8% −58.8% +30.eight% −30.eight% +117% −117% +88.9% −88.9% +65.4% −65.4% +167% −167% +143% −143% +0% +0% +72.7% −72.7% +104% −104% +vi.3% −half dozen.iii% +41.7% −41.vii% +143% −143% +0% +0% +100% −100% +81% −81% +41.seven% −41.7% +114% −114% +88.nine% −88.9% +80% −80% +88.9% −88.nine% +13.3% −13.iii% +94.4% −94.4% +113% −113% +66.7% −66.7% +183% −183% +88.9% −88.9% +88.9% −88.9% +88.9% −88.nine% +88.nine% −88.nine% +88.ix% −88.9% +88.9% −88.9% +88.9% −88.9% +88.9% −88.9% +200% −200% +88.9% −88.9% +88.9% −88.9% +178% −178% +88.nine% −88.9% +88.9% −88.9% +88.9% −88.9% +88.ix% −88.ix% +88.ix% −88.ix% +88.9% −88.9% +88.9% −88.9% +750% −750% +66.7% −66.7% +1600% −1600% +88.9% −88.ix% +1600% −1600% +88.ix% −88.ix% +88.ix% −88.9% +22.2% −22.2% +143% −143% +88.9% −88.nine% Judging past the results of constructed and gaming tests, Technical Metropolis recommends NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 since it shows better performance. Should you lot still have questions concerning pick between the reviewed GPUs, inquire them in Comments section, and we shall answer. Practise you lot think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics carte. We believe that the nearest equivalent to GeForce GTX 1050 from AMD is Radeon R9 270X, which is slower by iii% and lower by 6 positions in our rating. Hither are some closest AMD rivals to GeForce GTX 1050: We believe that the nearest equivalent to GeForce GT 1030 from AMD is Radeon HD 6850 X2, which is well-nigh equal in speed and higher by 1 position in our rating. Here are some closest AMD rivals to GeForce GT 1030: We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance more than or less close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider. Here you can run across the user rating of the graphics cards, besides as charge per unit them yourself. Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 on a calibration of i to 5: Rate NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 on a scale of i to 5: Here you tin can ask a question about this comparing, concur or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch. Graphics settings Screen resolution FPSGTX 1050 vs GT 1030
General info
Place in functioning rating 275 447 Value for money 9.fourteen 10.10 Architecture Pascal (2016−2021) Pascal (2016−2021) GPU code proper name N17P-G1 N17P-G1 Market segment Desktop Desktop Release date 25 October 2016 (5 years ago) 17 May 2017 (five years agone) Launch cost (MSRP) $109 $79 Cost now $290 (2.7x MSRP) $115 (ane.5x MSRP) Technical specs
Pipelines / CUDA cores 640 384 CUDA cores 640 no data Core clock speed 1290 MHz 1228 MHz Boost clock speed 1392 MHz 1670 MHz Number of transistors 3,300 million 1,800 million Manufacturing process technology 14 nm fourteen nm Thermal blueprint power (TDP) 75 Watt 30 Watt Maximum GPU temperature 97 °C no data Texture fill up rate 58.20 35.23 Floating-bespeak performance 1,862 gflops 1,127 gflops Compatibility, dimensions and requirements
Motorcoach support PCIe 3.0 no data Interface PCIe three.0 x16 PCIe three.0 x4 Length 5.7" (14.v cm) 145 mm Height four.38" (11.1 cm) no data Width 2-slot i-slot Recommended system ability (PSU) 300 Watt no data Supplementary power connectors None None SLI options - no data SLI - no data Memory
Retention type GDDR5 GDDR5 Maximum RAM amount ii GB iv GB Memory motorcoach width 128 Bit 64 Bit Retention clock speed 7008 MHz 6000 MHz Retention bandwidth 112 GB/south 48.06 GB/south Shared memory - - Video outputs and ports
Display Connectors DP 1.four, HDMI 2.0b, Dual Link-DVI 1x DVI, 1x HDMI Multi monitor back up + no information HDMI + + HDCP ii.2 no data G-SYNC support + + Technologies
GameStream + no information GPU Boost 3.0 no data VR Ready + + Ansel + no data API support
DirectX 12 (12_1) 12 (12_1) Shader Model 6.iv 6.4 OpenGL 4.5 4.half-dozen OpenCL ane.ii one.2 Vulkan 1.2.131 one.two.131 CUDA + vi.1 Benchmark performance
Overall score
Mining hashrates
Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) 279 Mh/s no data Decred / DCR (Decred) 0.85 Gh/s no data Monero / XMR (CryptoNight) 0.three kh/s 0.11 kh/s Zcash / ZEC (Equihash) 143.76 Sol/s no information Gaming operation
Full Hd 44 25 1440p 24 21 4K 22 9
Depression Preset
Medium Preset
Loftier Preset
Ultra Preset
High Preset
Ultra Preset
Loftier Preset
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey 38 18 Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−xviii 9−10 Battlefield 5 56 31 Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 34 23 Cyberpunk 2077 xvi−18 11 Far Weep v sixteen−18 xix Far Cry New Dawn 41 23 Forza Horizon 4 16−18 27 Hitman 3 16−xviii 22 Horizon Null Dawn 16−eighteen 15 Red Dead Redemption 2 31 9−10 Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27 17 Scout Dogs: Legion sixteen−xviii 13
Assassin's Creed Odyssey 26 12 Assassin's Creed Valhalla sixteen−xviii ix−10 Battlefield 5 43 26 Call of Duty: Modernistic Warfare 24 9−10 Cyberpunk 2077 16−18 7 Far Cry 5 16−18 17 Far Cry New Dawn 38 22 Forza Horizon 4 49 24 Hitman three xvi−18 16 Horizon Zero Dawn sixteen−xviii 12 Metro Exodus 17 7 Scarlet Dead Redemption ii 9 ix−10 Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24 12 The Witcher iii: Wild Hunt 38 21 Watch Dogs: Legion xvi−18 12
Assassinator's Creed Odyssey xv 7 Assassinator's Creed Valhalla 16−18 9−x Battlefield v 36 20 Cyberpunk 2077 16−18 9−10 Far Cry 5 xvi−18 15 Far Weep New Dawn 35 18 Forza Horizon 4 34 sixteen The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20 12 Watch Dogs: Legion sixteen−eighteen vi
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18 9−10 Hitman 3 xvi−xviii ix−10 Horizon Nix Dawn 16−xviii ix−10 Metro Exodus xvi−18 nine−10 Crimson Dead Redemption 2 16−18 9−10 Shadow of the Tomb Raider xvi−eighteen nine−ten
Assassinator's Creed Odyssey sixteen−eighteen ix−x Assassin'due south Creed Valhalla 16−18 nine−10 Battlefield five 27 9−10 Cyberpunk 2077 16−18 ix−10 Far Cry 5 xvi−18 9−ten Far Cry New Dawn 25 ix−ten Forza Horizon 4 16−xviii 9−10 Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18 9−10
Call of Duty: Modernistic Warfare 16−18 9−10 Hitman 3 16−18 9−10 Horizon Cipher Dawn 16−xviii ix−ten Metro Exodus sixteen−18 9−10 Crimson Dead Redemption ii 16−eighteen 9−x Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18 two The Witcher 3: Wild Chase 15 nine−10
Assassin'due south Creed Odyssey 16−18 one Assassin'southward Creed Valhalla xvi−18 9−10 Battleground 5 sixteen−18 1 Cyberpunk 2077 sixteen−18 nine−ten Far Cry v 16−18 nine−10 Far Weep New Dawn 11 9−x Forza Horizon 4 16−18 7 Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18 9−10 Advantages and disadvantages
Functioning rating 17.13 8.54 Novelty 25 October 2016 17 May 2017 Cost $109 $79 Memory double-decker width 128 64 Pipelines / CUDA cores 640 384 Memory bandwidth 112 48.06 Thermal blueprint power (TDP) 75 Watt xxx Watt
Cast your vote
Competitors of GeForce GTX 1050 by AMD
Competitors of GeForce GT 1030 by AMD
Like GPU comparisons
User rating
Questions and comments
Source: https://technical.city/en/video/GeForce-GTX-1050-vs-GeForce-GT-1030
0 Response to "Geforce Gt 1030 Vs Gtx 1050"
Post a Comment