Gtx 950 Vs Gtx 1050 Ti
1050 Ti vs 950
Price now 281$
Games supported 84%
Price now 186$
Games supported lxxx%
General info
Comparing of graphics card architecture, market place segment, value for money and other general parameters.
| Place in performance rating | 235 | 265 |
| Value for money | xiii.xi | 11.45 |
| Compages | Pascal (2016−2021) | Maxwell (2014−2018) |
| GPU lawmaking name | N17P-G1 | GM206 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 25 October 2016 (5 years ago) | 20 August 2015 (half dozen years ago) |
| Launch cost (MSRP) | $139 | $159 |
| Current price | $281 (2x MSRP) | $186 (1.2x MSRP) |
Value for coin
To get the alphabetize we compare the characteristics of video cards and their relative prices.
Technical specs
Full general performance parameters such every bit number of shaders, GPU core base of operations clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and adding speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, just for precise cess you have to consider their criterion and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 768 | 768 |
| CUDA cores | 768 | 768 |
| Core clock speed | 1290 MHz | 1024 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1392 MHz | 1188 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,300 one thousand thousand | 2,940 1000000 |
| Manufacturing process technology | xvi nm | 28 nm |
| Thermal design power (TDP) | 75 Watt | xc Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 97 °C | no data |
| Texture make full rate | 66.82 | 49.ii billion/sec |
| Floating-point performance | 2,138 gflops | 1,825 gflops |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements
Data on compatibility with other calculator components. Useful when choosing a future reckoner configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards information technology's interface and double-decker (motherboard compatibility), additional ability connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Charabanc support | no data | PCI Express 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe iii.0 x16 |
| Length | 145 mm | seven.938" (20.2 cm) |
| Height | no data | 4.376" (11.ane cm) |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Recommended system ability (PSU) | no data | 350 Watt |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 1x six-pins |
| SLI options | no information | + |
Retention
Parameters of retentivity installed: its blazon, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Annotation that GPUs integrated into processors have no dedicated VRAM and utilize a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory blazon | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | four GB | ii GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Scrap | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 7 GB/s | 6.half-dozen GB/s |
| Memory bandwidth | 112 GB/s | 105.6 GB/south |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Video outputs and ports
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 sure video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort ane.2 |
| Multi monitor support | no data | four displays |
| HDMI | + | + |
| HDCP | no data | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no information | 2048x1536 |
| One thousand-SYNC support | + | + |
| Audio input for HDMI | no information | Internal |
Technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information volition prove useful if you need some item engineering science for your purposes.
| GameStream | no information | + |
| GeForce ShadowPlay | no data | + |
| GPU Boost | no data | ii.0 |
| GameWorks | no data | + |
| VR Set | + | no data |
| Ansel | + | no information |
API support
APIs supported, including particular versions of those APIs.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | six.4 | 6.iv |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | four.v |
| OpenCL | ane.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | one.two.131 | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | + | + |
Benchmark functioning
Not-gaming benchmark operation comparison. Note that overall benchmark functioning is measured in points in 0-100 range.
Overall score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. Nosotros are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if yous find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems apace.
- Passmark
- 3DMark 11 Performance GPU
- 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
- 3DMark Fire Strike Score
- 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
- GeekBench 5 OpenCL
- GeekBench v Vulkan
- GeekBench 5 CUDA
This is probably the nigh ubiquitous criterion, function of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics bill of fare a thorough evaluation under various load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the terminal existence done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
Benchmark coverage: 25%
3DMark eleven is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark past Futuremark. Information technology used iv tests based on ii scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by 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. Merely similar Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in Jan 2020 and replaced past 3DMark Night Raid.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
Fire Strike is a DirectX eleven benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a peppery animal seemingly made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Burn Strike shows off some realistic enough graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from xi dissimilar test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API past Khronos Grouping.
Benchmark coverage: 9%
Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics carte du jour benchmark combined from eleven 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: 5%
Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card criterion 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: five%
Mining hashrates
Cryptocurrency mining performance of GeForce GTX 1050 Ti and GeForce GTX 950. Usually measured in megahashes per second.
| Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 326 Mh/s | 233 Mh/s |
| Decred / DCR (Decred) | 1.01 Gh/s | no data |
| Ethereum / ETH (DaggerHashimoto) | 12.62 Mh/s | 9.97 Mh/due south |
| Monero / XMR (CryptoNight) | 0.3 kh/s | no information |
| Zcash / ZEC (Equihash) | 156.48 Sol/s | no data |
Gaming performance
Let's run into how expert the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Detail gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games beyond dissimilar resolutions:
| Full HD | 51 | 52 |
| 1440p | 31 | no information |
| 4K | 25 | 21 |
- Total Hard disk
Low Preset - Full Hd
Medium Preset - Total HD
High Preset - Total HD
Ultra Preset - 1440p
High Preset - 1440p
Ultra Preset - 4KHigh Preset
- 4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24 | 18−20 |
| Assassinator's Creed Odyssey | 48 +167% | 18−20 −167% |
| Assassin'southward Creed Valhalla | 21−24 +16.7% | 18−20 −xvi.vii% |
| Battlefield 5 | 63 +250% | 18−20 −250% |
| Phone call of Duty: Modernistic Warfare | 21−24 +xvi.seven% | 18−xx −16.7% |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24 +sixteen.seven% | 18−20 −16.7% |
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24 +16.seven% | 18−20 −xvi.7% |
| Far Weep New Dawn | 48 +167% | 18−twenty −167% |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 69 +283% | 18−20 −283% |
| Hitman 3 | 21−24 +xvi.seven% | xviii−20 −16.7% |
| Horizon Cypher Dawn | 21−24 +16.7% | eighteen−20 −16.seven% |
| Cherry Expressionless Redemption two | 35 +94.4% | 18−20 −94.4% |
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 31 +72.2% | eighteen−20 −72.2% |
| Picket Dogs: Legion | 21−24 +16.7% | xviii−20 −16.seven% |
| Assassinator'south Creed Odyssey | xl +122% | eighteen−20 −122% |
| Assassin'due south Creed Valhalla | 21−24 +16.seven% | xviii−20 −sixteen.7% |
| Battlefield 5 | 52 +189% | eighteen−20 −189% |
| Call of Duty: Modernistic Warfare | 39 +117% | xviii−20 −117% |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24 +xvi.7% | 18−20 −16.seven% |
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24 +sixteen.vii% | 18−20 −16.7% |
| Far Cry New Dawn | 45 +150% | 18−20 −150% |
| Forza Horizon four | 64 +256% | 18−xx −256% |
| Hitman 3 | 21−24 +16.vii% | 18−xx −16.vii% |
| Horizon Naught Dawn | 21−24 +16.seven% | xviii−twenty −16.seven% |
| Metro Exodus | 26 +44.four% | xviii−xx −44.iv% |
| Reddish Expressionless Redemption two | 18 +0% | 18−20 +0% |
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 27 +50% | 18−20 −50% |
| The Witcher three: Wild Hunt | 49 +28.9% | 38 −28.ix% |
| Sentry Dogs: Legion | 21−24 +xvi.seven% | xviii−20 −16.7% |
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 24 +33.3% | eighteen−20 −33.3% |
| Assassinator'due south Creed Valhalla | 21−24 +sixteen.7% | eighteen−20 −16.7% |
| Battleground 5 | 51 +183% | xviii−20 −183% |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24 +16.7% | 18−20 −16.vii% |
| Far Cry 5 | 36 +100% | 18−twenty −100% |
| Far Cry New Dawn | 41 +128% | xviii−20 −128% |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45 +150% | 18−twenty −150% |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 26 +23.8% | 21 −23.eight% |
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 21−24 +16.7% | 18−twenty −16.vii% |
| Telephone call of Duty: Modernistic Warfare | 24 +33.3% | 18−20 −33.3% |
| Hitman 3 | 21−24 +16.7% | xviii−20 −16.7% |
| Horizon Nil Dawn | 21−24 +sixteen.vii% | 18−20 −xvi.7% |
| Metro Exodus | 21−24 +16.seven% | eighteen−20 −16.vii% |
| Ruby-red Dead Redemption 2 | 21−24 +sixteen.7% | 18−20 −sixteen.7% |
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 21−24 +sixteen.7% | 18−twenty −xvi.7% |
| Assassin'south Creed Odyssey | 21−24 +16.seven% | 18−xx −xvi.7% |
| Assassinator's Creed Valhalla | 21−24 +16.7% | eighteen−20 −xvi.7% |
| Battlefield 5 | 36 +100% | 18−20 −100% |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24 +16.7% | 18−xx −16.7% |
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24 +16.7% | eighteen−20 −sixteen.7% |
| Far Cry New Dawn | 29 +61.1% | 18−20 −61.i% |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24 +xvi.7% | eighteen−20 −xvi.7% |
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 21−24 +16.7% | 18−xx −16.7% |
| Phone call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 21−24 +16.7% | eighteen−20 −sixteen.7% |
| Hitman 3 | 21−24 +sixteen.7% | 18−20 −16.7% |
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 21−24 +16.vii% | 18−20 −16.7% |
| Metro Exodus | nine −100% | 18−20 +100% |
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 21−24 +16.7% | 18−20 −16.seven% |
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 21−24 +xvi.vii% | eighteen−20 −xvi.7% |
| The Witcher three: Wild Hunt | 21−24 +61.v% | 13 −61.v% |
| Assassin'south Creed Odyssey | 21−24 +16.seven% | eighteen−20 −16.7% |
| Assassinator's Creed Valhalla | 21−24 +xvi.seven% | 18−xx −16.vii% |
| Battleground 5 | 18 +0% | 18−20 +0% |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24 +xvi.7% | 18−20 −xvi.7% |
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24 +16.vii% | 18−20 −sixteen.7% |
| Far Weep New Dawn | 14 −28.vi% | 18−20 +28.6% |
| Forza Horizon iv | xx +11.1% | 18−20 −eleven.1% |
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 21−24 +16.vii% | 18−20 −16.7% |
Advantages and disadvantages
| Functioning rating | 21.26 | 18.16 |
| Novelty | 25 October 2016 | twenty August 2015 |
| Toll | $139 | $159 |
| Memory bandwidth | 112 | 105.6 |
| Chip lithography | xvi nm | 28 nm |
| Thermal design power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 90 Watt |
Judging by the results of synthetic and gaming tests, Technical Metropolis recommends
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti
since it shows better functioning.
Should y'all still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, enquire them in Comments department, and nosotros shall answer.
Bandage your vote
Do you call back nosotros are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote past clicking "Like" button nigh your favorite graphics card.
Competitors of GeForce GTX 1050 Ti by AMD
We believe that the nearest equivalent to GeForce GTX 1050 Ti from AMD is Radeon R9 380, which is slower by 1% and lower by 1 position in our rating.
Hither are some closest AMD rivals to GeForce GTX 1050 Ti:
Competitors of GeForce GTX 950 past AMD
We believe that the nearest equivalent to GeForce GTX 950 from AMD is Radeon HD 7970, which is slower by iii% and lower by 6 positions in our rating.
Here are some closest AMD rivals to GeForce GTX 950:
Similar GPU comparisons
Nosotros selected several comparisons of graphics cards with functioning more or less close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
User rating
Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.
Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti on a scale of 1 to 5:
Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 on a scale of 1 to 5:
Questions and comments
Here yous can ask a question well-nigh this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.
Graphics settings
Screen resolution
FPS
Source: https://technical.city/en/video/GeForce-GTX-1050-Ti-vs-GeForce-GTX-950
0 Response to "Gtx 950 Vs Gtx 1050 Ti"
Post a Comment