NVIDIA GeForce GT 545 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Comparison

The GeForce GTX 1050 and GeForce GT 545 represent two very different eras of NVIDIA’s budget lineup. The data shows a generational chasm between them, with the newer Pascal card delivering a level of performance that completely eclipses the older Fermi part. This comparison is less about a close contest and more about quantifying the massive strides made in GPU architecture over a five-year period.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are staggering. The GTX 1050 scores 15,233, while the GT 545 manages just 3,594. This represents a 323.8% advantage for the GTX 1050, meaning it is more than four times faster in this compute-oriented workload. This is not a marginal improvement; it is a complete overhaul of performance expectations.

Looking at the average benchmark scores, the GTX 1050’s overall average is 3,629, which is only slightly higher than the GT 545’s 3,594. This appears contradictory to the OpenCL result, but it is explained by the breadth of tests. The GTX 1050’s average is pulled down by its very low scores in specific legacy tests, like the PassMark DirectX 10 score of 24 and the DirectX 12 score of 20. In contrast, the GT 545 has only a single benchmark entry, the Geekbench OpenCL score of 3,594, which conveniently serves as its average. The GTX 1050’s OpenCL score is its strongest result by a wide margin, demonstrating that its compute potential is its standout feature, while its compatibility with older APIs appears to be a weakness in these specific tests.

The nearest rivals data confirms that the GTX 1050 and GT 545 are considered close in overall average performance. The GTX 1050’s average of 3,629 is just 1% higher than the GT 545’s 3,594. This placement is misleading, however. The GTX 1050 is also listed alongside the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation (average 3,596, delta of 0.9%) and the AMD Radeon HD 6770 (average 3,649, delta of -0.5%). This clustering of scores suggests that the average benchmark metric is not a reliable indicator of real-world capability, especially when one card (the GT 545) has only a single data point. The GTX 1050’s true strength is its peak performance, as evidenced by its OpenCL score, rather than its average across all tests.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental difference lies in the underlying architecture and manufacturing process. The GTX 1050 is built on the Pascal architecture using the GP107 chip, manufactured on a 14 nm process at Samsung. The GT 545, in contrast, uses the older Fermi 2.0 architecture with the GF116 chip, produced on a 40 nm process at TSMC. This process node difference is enormous, allowing the GTX 1050 to pack 3,300 million transistors into a die size of just 132 mm². The GT 545, with only 1,170 million transistors, requires a larger die at 238 mm². This results in a transistor density of 25.0M / mm² for the GTX 1050 versus a paltry 4.9M / mm² for the GT 545.

The compute resources are also in a different league. The GTX 1050 features 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 raster output units (ROPs). The GT 545 is equipped with only 144 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This disparity in core counts directly translates to raw throughput. The GTX 1050 achieves a pixel rate of 46.56 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 58.20 GTexel/s, compared to the GT 545’s 4.320 GPixel/s and 17.28 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance tells a similar story, with the GTX 1050 delivering 1.862 TFLOPS versus the GT 545’s 414.7 GFLOPS.

Memory technology is another key separator. The GTX 1050 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 112.1 GB/s. The GT 545 uses 1536 MB of DDR3 memory on a wider 192-bit bus, but only achieves 38.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 1050’s memory clock is 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective), while the GT 545’s is 800 MHz (1600 Mbps effective). This massive bandwidth advantage is critical for modern games and compute workloads. The bus interface also differs, with the GTX 1050 using PCIe 3.0 x16 and the GT 545 using the older PCIe 2.0 x16.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 1050 is the clear winner in almost every conceivable scenario. Its dominant OpenCL score of 15,233 indicates a significant advantage in compute-heavy tasks like video encoding, machine learning inference, and scientific simulation. The massive bandwidth and higher FP32 throughput make it far more capable for modern gaming at 1080p, especially with higher texture quality and resolution. Its support for Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 (12_1) means it can run modern APIs that the GT 545 cannot, as the older card has no Vulkan support and only DirectX 12 (11_0). The GTX 1050’s display outputs include DisplayPort 1.4a and HDMI 2.0, which are essential for connecting to modern monitors and VR headsets.

The GT 545’s only potential advantage is its lower power draw. The data lists its TDP as 70 W, which is slightly lower than the GTX 1050’s 75 W. In a strictly power-constrained environment, the GT 545 could be seen as more efficient, but the performance differential is so vast that this minor power saving is almost irrelevant. The GT 545 also includes a VGA output, which could be useful for connecting to very old displays, but this is a niche legacy feature. The GTX 1050’s single-slot cooler is also a feature, but the GTX 1050 is a dual-slot card, which is a minor physical consideration. The GT 545’s higher launch MSRP of 149 USD compared to the GTX 1050’s 109 USD further cements the newer card as the superior product.

FAQ

Q: Is the GTX 1050 faster than the GT 545 in compute workloads?

A: Yes, overwhelmingly. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 1050 scores 15,233 versus the GT 545’s 3,594, a 323.8% difference.

Q: Why are the average benchmark scores so close if the GTX 1050 is so much faster?

A: The GTX 1050’s average of 3,629 is dragged down by very low scores in legacy tests like PassMark DirectX 10 (24) and DirectX 12 (20). The GT 545 has only one benchmark result, its OpenCL score of 3,594, which serves as its average.

Q: Do these cards support the same modern graphics APIs?

A: No. The GTX 1050 supports Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 (12_1). The GT 545 has no Vulkan support and only supports DirectX 12 (11_0).

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The GTX 1050 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 112.1 GB/s bandwidth. The GT 545 uses 1536 MB of DDR3 on a 192-bit bus with 38.40 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a lower power draw?

A: The GT 545 has a slightly lower TDP of 70 W compared to the GTX 1050’s 75 W. Both have a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Q: Which card is listed as a closer rival to the other in the data?

A: The data lists the GT 545 as a nearest rival to the GTX 1050 with a delta of 1% based on average score. The GTX 1050 is listed as a nearest rival to the GT 545 with a delta of -1%.

Specification Differences

| Feature | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 545 |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Architecture | Pascal | Fermi 2.0 |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 40 nm |

| Foundry | Samsung | TSMC |

| Transistors | 3,300 million | 1,170 million |

| Die Size | 132 mm² | 238 mm² |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 1536 MB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 112.1 GB/s | 38.40 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 640 | 144 |

| TMUs | 40 | 24 |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 46.56 GPixel/s | 4.320 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 58.20 GTexel/s | 17.28 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 1.862 TFLOPS | 414.7 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 75 W | 70 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.3a, 1x VGA |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | None |

| Launch MSRP | 109 USD | 149 USD |

The Verdict

The data is unequivocal. The GeForce GTX 1050 is the superior graphics card in nearly every measurable way. Its 323.8% lead in the OpenCL benchmark, combined with its modern architecture, higher bandwidth, and support for current APIs, makes it the only sensible choice for any modern workload. The GT 545 is a relic of a bygone era, and its only saving grace is a marginally lower TDP of 70 W versus 75 W.

For a user seeking to play modern games, use compute applications, or connect to current display hardware, the GTX 1050 is the definitive pick. Its FP32 performance of 1.862 TFLOPS and 112.1 GB/s of bandwidth are foundational for a playable experience. The GT 545, with its 414.7 GFLOPS and 38.40 GB/s bandwidth, would struggle immensely with any contemporary software. The GT 545’s single data point in the benchmark suite provides a baseline, but it is a baseline from a different technological era. The verdict is clear: the GTX 1050 wins on performance, features, and even had a lower launch MSRP of 109 USD compared to 149 USD. The GT 545 is only relevant as a historical artifact or for a system with a strict power limit and no need for modern display connectivity.