Component comparison
Quadro T1000 vs GeForce GTX 1050 Ti
Quadro T1000 vs GeForce GTX 1050 Ti — detailed GPU comparison: performance, gaming FPS, specifications.
Advantages
A
Quadro T1000
- + Release year (+3)
- + Lithography (nm) (-2 nm)
- + Energy efficiency (+8.4)
- + PassMark (overall) (+150)
- + Geekbench OpenCL (+13196)
- + Geekbench Vulkan (+9935)
- + Normalized score (+5.1)
B
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti
- + TGP / TDP (W) (+25 W)
Detailed spec comparison
| Spec |
Component A
Quadro T1000
|
Component B
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti
|
|---|---|---|
| Release year | 2019 (+3) | 2016 |
| VRAM (GB) | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory clock (MHz) | 8000 MHz | — |
| Bandwidth (GB/s) | — | 112 GB/s |
| Memory bus (bit) | 128 bit | 128 bit |
| TGP / TDP (W) | 50 W | 75 W (+25 W) |
| Lithography (nm) | 12 nm (-2 nm) | 14 nm |
| Transistors (M) | — | 3,300M |
| Die size (mm²) | — | 132 mm² |
| Base clock (MHz) | — | — |
| Boost clock (MHz) | 1455 MHz | — |
| CUDA cores | 768 | 768 |
| TMUs | — | 48 |
| ROPs | — | 32 |
| RT cores | — | — |
| Tensor cores | — | — |
| FP32 performance (TFLOPS) | — | 2.18 TFLOPS |
| Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) | — | 44.54 GPixel/s |
| Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) | — | 66.82 GTexel/s |
| Energy efficiency | 24.1 (+8.4) | 15.8 |
| PassMark (overall) | 6,513 (+150) | 6,363 |
| 3DMark Time Spy | — | 2,261 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike | — | 7,485 |
| Geekbench OpenCL | 33,850 (+13196) | 20,654 |
| Geekbench Vulkan | 29,725 (+9935) | 19,790 |
| Normalized score | 45.9 (+5.1) | 40.8 |
In both
CUDA
FPS in games (1080p)
| Game | Quadro T1000 | GeForce GTX 1050 Ti | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anno 1800 | 37 FPS | 39 FPS | 5.4% (B) |
| Apex Legends | 58 FPS | 43 FPS | +34.9% (A) |
| Assassin´s Creed Odyssey | 35 FPS | 31 FPS | +12.9% (A) |
| Battlefield V | 38 FPS | 57 FPS | 50% (B) |
| Borderlands 3 | 38 FPS | 28 FPS | +35.7% (A) |
| CS:GO | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2019 | 51 FPS | 36 FPS | +41.7% (A) |
| Control | 31 FPS | 22 FPS | +40.9% (A) |
| Dirt Rally 2.0 | 64 FPS | 45 FPS | +42.2% (A) |
| Dota 2 Reborn | 113 FPS | 98 FPS | +15.3% (A) |
| Escape from Tarkov | 68 FPS | 45 FPS | +51.1% (A) |
| F1 2019 | 61 FPS | 63 FPS | 3.3% (B) |
| FIFA 19 | 114 FPS | 115 FPS | 0.9% (B) |
| FIFA 20 | 160 FPS | 154 FPS | +3.9% (A) |
| Far Cry 5 | 57 FPS | 48 FPS | +18.8% (A) |
| Far Cry New Dawn | 46 FPS | 42 FPS | +9.5% (A) |
| Farming Simulator 19 | 86 FPS | 77 FPS | +11.7% (A) |
| Final Fantasy XV Benchmark | 31 FPS | 23 FPS | +34.8% (A) |
| For Honor | 64 FPS | 41 FPS | +56.1% (A) |
| GRID 2019 | 65 FPS | 34 FPS | +91.2% (A) |
| GTA V | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| GTA V | 94 FPS | 60 FPS | +56.7% (A) |
| Gears Tactics | 58 FPS | 49 FPS | +18.4% (A) |
| Ghost Recon Breakpoint | 47 FPS | 35 FPS | +34.3% (A) |
| Ghost Recon Wildlands | 44 FPS | 40 FPS | +10% (A) |
| Hunt Showdown | 44 FPS | 34 FPS | +29.4% (A) |
| Kingdom Come: Deliverance | 41 FPS | 38 FPS | +7.9% (A) |
| Metro Exodus | 32 FPS | 31 FPS | +3.2% (A) |
| Need for Speed Heat | 52 FPS | 42 FPS | +23.8% (A) |
| Overwatch | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| PUBG | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Rage 2 | 46 FPS | 32 FPS | +43.8% (A) |
| Rainbow Six Siege | 112 FPS | 75 FPS | +49.3% (A) |
| Rise of the Tomb Raider | 53 FPS | 33 FPS | +60.6% (A) |
| Rocket League | 117 FPS | 106 FPS | +10.4% (A) |
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 40 FPS | 31 FPS | +29% (A) |
| Star Wars Jedi Fallen Order | 58 FPS | 47 FPS | +23.4% (A) |
| The Division 2 | 36 FPS | 35 FPS | +2.9% (A) |
| The Witcher 3 | 53 FPS | 21 FPS | +152.4% (A) |
| X-Plane 11.11 | 57 FPS | 44 FPS | +29.5% (A) |
Specs from public sources (PassMark, Geekbench). FPS measured at 1080p medium settings.
Based on the comparison:
Quadro T1000 wins 7 of the comparable criteria.
The choice depends on your use case.
🤔 How to choose
Universal advice for any use case.
- Reliability vs price: reliability (median 50) ↔ price (median 385.1).
- Weight vs CPU: mobility (median 48) ↔ overall performance (median 49.8).
- Upgradeability vs battery: upgradability (median 50) ↔ battery life (median 2.8).