Name: 169元的GTX 1650超級能超越2015年549元的R9 Fury嗎？ (Can The $169 GTX 1650 Super Outperform 2015's $549 R9 Fury?)
Uploaded: 2021-01-14T09:53:40.000Z
Duration: 5 min 36 s
Description: 【看影片學英語】數萬部 YouTube 影片，搭配英漢字典即點即查，輕鬆掌握單字發音與用法，長久累積看電影不必再看字幕。

have you ever wanna welcome to another video?

Now, in the previous video, we took a look at the radio on Our Night Fury, a high end graphics card from 2015.

反身代名詞

We saw that this once $500 or £400 plus part could still handle itself when it came to playing new games with respectable settings and frame rates.

At the end of that video, I mentioned that an NVIDIA GTX 16 50 Super might be a better choice because it should offer similar performance.

Can a new, well newish $159 or £149 entry level graphics card keep up with or even outperform, a top of the range parts from nearly five years ago?

Spec Wise The Fury is clocked at 1050 megahertz features 3000 584 shade of cause and four gigs of H B M memory.

Clocked at 500 megahertz, it requires two aping connectors and has a 275.

The 16 50 Super What is I feel the best entry level graphics card out there at the moment has 1280 Shade Er's 15 30 megahertz clock speed, a memory clock of 1500 megahertz and four gigs of GDR six.

It requires 18 pin connector and has a T V P of 100 watts.

It's also far easier to find and usually a little juniper.

Peter Arno Fury fell 11 frames short of the 16 50 Super, though both the results were very respectable.

50 s, as I shall now call it, also exhibited better percentile figures, though again the R nine was still doing a great job.

Both cards also shared very similar temperatures.

On my single fan, 16 50 s was a little louder if I'm being honest at 14 40 pay.

The average frame rate was even closer, though the 16 50 s Porter had yet again, with better percent o figures.

Once more for these tests, I ran the in game benchmark, which consisted of a single computer generated race.

I did run this a few times just to double check.

Both cards are, however, capable off handling fault, sir.

So and this is where the radio on Arnaud and pulled ahead.

Both results were good enough to play the game just fine, though the R nine made far lighter work of this Triple A blockbuster at 1920 by 10 80 Theo, nine was a solid 10 frames ahead on average as we ran the benchmark test and then played through the first level, switching to 14 40 p.

And again, the are nine came out on top with roughly the same margin as beforehand.

I have retested the game since yesterday multiple times using slightly different settings.

And to be honest, I thought the gap might be closer between the cards but clearly know so it's probably now, and I tested this across different maps with each card.

At both resolutions, the average of 10 80 p was higher with the 16 50 s only slightly, though, but the R nine was certainly more stable.

Look at the difference in the 0.1% and 1% lows.

The footage you're seeing maybe varied map wise, but all the benchmarks were carried out under the same conditions.

A 10 80 p on 14 40 p was even closer average wise because it waas the same again, though the theory was more consistent as faras, the other figures were concerned.

But again, there were no major problems with either the honor of Fury or the 16 50 Super when running play unknowns battle grounds.

This is a game that generally favors in video card.

So I wanted to see what we could expect some, whether this meant that there would be a larger gap between the two or four results.

50 s with a huge jump in performance, not just a CE faras.

The average is concerned, but as faras, thes stutter or lack thereof is concern, too.

We saw fire list drops with 16 50 s, but as I said, the elder worlds does generally favor in videos GP use.

Having said that, the gap was closed a little at 14.

40 p, with the average becoming even tighter.

Those 1.1% lows did still tell a story, and that story ends with the video card once again coming out on top.

Both cards are great, and it goes to show you that if you bought a radio on our night fury and 2015 then your investment was a good one, as not only can it still keep up or do better, depending on the game.

But you could probably get more for it if you were to sell it on the used market than you would for a 16 50 super.

And that's definitely a factor worth keeping in mind as well as they can be harder to find and therefore hiring price with these the most scientifically accurate tests in the world, of course, no, but I hope you found them interesting nonetheless.

Furthermore, if one of your games prefers a certain company over the other, perhaps it's optimized for a M D rather than in video or vice versa.

Then you may see significantly different results there as well, but I think in a lot of cases we don't really need toe carry out too many tests because you are going to see very close results in a lot of titles.

The 16 50 s certainly does sound like the more sensible by, though, thank you very much for watching if you enjoy this video lever, like when it down below.

 If you didn't enjoy this video, leave a dislike on it, subscribe to the channel if you haven't done so already, and hopefully I'll see all of you in the next one. 