GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile vs Radeon Pro W5700
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon Pro W5700 with GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile, including specs and performance data.
Pro W5700 outperforms GTX 1050 Ti Mobile by a whopping 152% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 124 | 356 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 46.09 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 12.94 | 14.01 |
| Architecture | RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) | Pascal (2016−2021) |
| GPU code name | Navi 10 | GP107 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 19 November 2019 (5 years ago) | 3 January 2017 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $799 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 2304 | 768 |
| Core clock speed | 1243 MHz | 1493 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1930 MHz | 1620 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 10,300 million | 3,300 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 205 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | no data | 97 °C |
| Texture fill rate | 277.9 | 77.76 |
| Floating-point processing power | 8.893 TFLOPS | 2.488 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64 | 32 |
| TMUs | 144 | 48 |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Laptop size | no data | large |
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 305 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | no data |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz | 7 GB/s |
| Memory bandwidth | 448.0 GB/s | 112 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). 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.
| Display Connectors | 5x mini-DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C | No outputs |
| G-SYNC support | - | + |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Ansel | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | - | + |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 140−150
+150%
| 56
−150%
|
| 1440p | 60−65
+140%
| 25
−140%
|
| 4K | 40−45
+135%
| 17
−135%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 5.71 | no data |
| 1440p | 13.32 | no data |
| 4K | 19.98 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 59
+0%
|
59
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 47
+0%
|
47
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 62
+0%
|
62
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 56
+0%
|
56
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 33
+0%
|
33
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 49
+0%
|
49
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 92
+0%
|
92
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 44
+0%
|
44
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 76
+0%
|
76
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 57
+0%
|
57
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 55
+0%
|
55
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 19
+0%
|
19
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 52
+0%
|
52
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 47
+0%
|
47
+0%
|
| World of Tanks | 190−200
+0%
|
190−200
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 42
+0%
|
42
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 86
+0%
|
86
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 40
+0%
|
40
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 43
+0%
|
43
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 39
+0%
|
39
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 26
+0%
|
26
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 54
+0%
|
54
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12
+0%
|
12
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 29
+0%
|
29
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 26
+0%
|
26
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 32
+0%
|
32
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7
+0%
|
7
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 17
+0%
|
17
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12
+0%
|
12
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 9
+0%
|
9
+0%
|
This is how Pro W5700 and GTX 1050 Ti Mobile compete in popular games:
- Pro W5700 is 150% faster in 1080p
- Pro W5700 is 140% faster in 1440p
- Pro W5700 is 135% faster in 4K
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 41 test (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 36.95 | 14.64 |
| Recency | 19 November 2019 | 3 January 2017 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 205 Watt | 75 Watt |
Pro W5700 has a 152.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
GTX 1050 Ti Mobile, on the other hand, has 173.3% lower power consumption.
The Radeon Pro W5700 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon Pro W5700 is a workstation card while GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
