GeForce GTX 770 vs 1050 Ti |
Released May, 2013
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
- 1 GHz
- 2 GB GDDR5
6.9 Out of 10
by techPowerUp!The new reference design PCB also allowed NVIDIA to, aside from giving the GK104 a strong enough VRM to maintain those high clock speeds, deploy its brand new GPU Boost 2.0 technology, which makes higher GPU core clock speeds available to demanding applications by taking into account not only power draw but also GPU temperatures.
VS
Released October, 2016
Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050 Ti
- 1.3 GHz
- 4 GB GDDR5
6.9 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.
GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 770 vs 1050 Ti 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 | |
No winner declared
Too close to call
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with GPUBoss?
VS
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770GPUBoss Winner |  | |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Higher memory bandwidth | 224 GB/s | vs | 112.1 GB/s | Around 2x higher memory bandwidth | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Higher texture rate | 134 GTexel/s | vs | 62 GTexel/s | Around 2.2x higher texture rate | |||
| Better floating-point performance | 3,213 GFLOPS | vs | 1,983 GFLOPS | More than 60% better floating-point performance | |||
| Much higher crysis 3 framerate | 84 | vs | 35.8 | More than 2.2x higher crysis 3 framerate | |||
| Significantly more texture mapping units | 128 | vs | 48 | 80 more texture mapping units | |||
| Better ocean surface simulation score | 1,631.29 frames/s | vs | 815.53 frames/s | More than 2x better ocean surface simulation score | |||
| More shading units | 1,536 | vs | 768 | Twice as many shading units | |||
| Better sky diver factor score | 381.9 | vs | 348.62 | Around 10% better sky diver factor score | |||
| Slightly wider memory bus | 256 bit | vs | 128 bit | 2x wider memory bus | |||
| |||||||
| Higher clock speed | 1,291 MHz | vs | 1,046 MHz | Around 25% higher clock speed | |||
| More memory | 4,096 MB | vs | 2,048 MB | 2x more memory | |||
| Higher turbo clock speed | 1,392 MHz | vs | 1,085 MHz | Around 30% higher turbo clock speed | |||
| Slightly higher pixel rate | 41.3 GPixel/s | vs | 33.5 GPixel/s | Around 25% higher pixel rate | |||
| Significantly lower TDP | 75W | vs | 230W | 3.1x lower TDP | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of GeForce GTX 770 vs 1050 Ti
Bitcoin mining Data courtesy CompuBench
Face detection Data courtesy CompuBench
T-Rex (GFXBench 3.0) Data courtesy CompuBench
Manhattan (GFXBench 3.0) Data courtesy CompuBench
Fire Strike Factor Data courtesy FutureMark
Sky Diver Factor Data courtesy FutureMark
Battlefield 4
Crysis 3
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
Popular Comparisons
Read more
Comments
Showing 1 comment.
