Winner
Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050
GPUBoss recommends the Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050 based on its benchmarks.
See full details GeForce GTX 1050 vs 930A |
Released October, 2016
Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050
- 1.4 GHz
- 2 GB GDDR5
6.8 Out of 10
by www.tweaktown.com (Oct, 2016)NVIDIA's impressive Pascal architecture has some nice tricks under its 16nm FinFET hood, but the Twin Frozr VI cooler is 40% quieter than its predecessor (the Twin Frozr V), and it also keeps the card 20% cooler.
VS
Released March, 2015
Nvidia GeForce 930A
- 928 MHz
- 2 GB DDR3
6.1 Out of 10
by Nick-Farrell (Feb, 2014)This graphics core incorporates several new features that allow it to improve energy efficiency by 40 percent - essentially giving longer battery life for the same performance or improving performance when you really need it," Kolar wrote.
GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 1050 vs 930A among all GPUs
Gaming | |
| | |
| Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 21 more | |
Graphics | |
| | |
| T-Rex, Manhattan, Cloud Gate Factor, Sky Diver Factor and 1 more | |
Computing | |
| | |
| Face Detection, Ocean Surface Simulation and 3 more | |
Performance per Watt | |
| | |
| Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more | |
Noise and Power | |
| | |
| TDP, Idle Power Consumption, Load Power Consumption and 2 more | |
| 6.8 | Overall Score |
| | |
 | Winner |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with GPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Significantly higher clock speed | 1,354 MHz | vs | 928 MHz | More than 45% higher clock speed | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much higher effective memory clock speed | 7,008 MHz | vs | 1,800 MHz | Around 4x higher effective memory clock speed | |||
| Better PassMark score | 4,443 | vs | 1,152 | More than 3.8x better PassMark score | |||
| Higher memory bandwidth | 112.1 GB/s | vs | 14.4 GB/s | More than 7.8x higher memory bandwidth | |||
| Higher pixel rate | 46.56 GPixel/s | vs | 7.42 GPixel/s | More than 6.2x higher pixel rate | |||
| Significantly higher turbo clock speed | 1,455 MHz | vs | 941 MHz | Around 55% higher turbo clock speed | |||
| Better floating-point performance | 1,862 GFLOPS | vs | 712.7 GFLOPS | More than 2.5x better floating-point performance | |||
| Much higher memory clock speed | 1,752 MHz | vs | 900 MHz | Around 95% higher memory clock speed | |||
| More render output processors | 32 | vs | 8 | 24 more render output processors | |||
| Higher texture rate | 58.2 GTexel/s | vs | 22.27 GTexel/s | More than 2.5x higher texture rate | |||
| Slightly more shading units | 640 | vs | 384 | 256 more shading units | |||
| Slightly more texture mapping units | 40 | vs | 24 | 16 more texture mapping units | |||
| |||||||
| Lower TDP | 33W | vs | 75W | 2.3x lower TDP | |||
Report a correction
