AMD PRO A12-9800 vs AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G
Vergleichende Analyse von AMD PRO A12-9800 und AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G Prozessoren für alle bekannten Merkmale in den folgenden Kategorien: Essenzielles, Leistung, Speicher, Grafik, Grafikschnittstellen, Unterstützung der Grafik-API, Kompatibilität, Peripherien, Fortschrittliche Technologien, Virtualisierung. Benchmark-Prozessorleistungsanalyse: PassMark - Single thread mark, PassMark - CPU mark, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Unterschiede
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der AMD PRO A12-9800
- Etwa 8% höhere Taktfrequenz: 4.2 GHz vs 3.9 GHz
| Maximale Frequenz | 4.2 GHz vs 3.9 GHz |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G
- CPU ist neuer: Startdatum 1 Jahr(e) 7 Monat(e) später
- Der Prozessor ist entsperrt, ein entsperrter Multiplikator ermöglicht eine einfachere Übertaktung
- Etwa 6% höhere Kerntemperatur: 95°C vs 90°C
- Ein neuerer Herstellungsprozess ermöglicht einen leistungsfähigeren, aber dennoch kühleren laufenden Prozessor: 14 nm FinFET vs 28 nm
- Etwa 28% bessere Leistung in PassMark - Single thread mark: 2154 vs 1686
- 2.3x bessere Leistung in PassMark - CPU mark: 8512 vs 3705
- Etwa 62% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 42.509 vs 26.268
- Etwa 41% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 393.562 vs 279.396
- Etwa 56% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.082 vs 1.975
- Etwa 43% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 49.002 vs 34.196
- Etwa 59% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 208.928 vs 131.8
- Etwa 58% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1858 vs 1176
- 4.2x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1994 vs 477
- 3.2x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 5566 vs 1715
- Etwa 58% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1858 vs 1176
- 4.2x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1994 vs 477
- 3.2x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 5566 vs 1715
| Spezifikationen | |
| Startdatum | 10 May 2018 vs 3 October 2016 |
| Freigegeben | Freigegeben vs Gesperrt |
| Maximale Kerntemperatur | 95°C vs 90°C |
| Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 14 nm FinFET vs 28 nm |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - Single thread mark | 2154 vs 1686 |
| PassMark - CPU mark | 8512 vs 3705 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 42.509 vs 26.268 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 393.562 vs 279.396 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.082 vs 1.975 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 49.002 vs 34.196 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 208.928 vs 131.8 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1858 vs 1176 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1994 vs 477 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 5566 vs 1715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1858 vs 1176 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1994 vs 477 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 5566 vs 1715 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
CPU 1: AMD PRO A12-9800
CPU 2: AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G
| PassMark - Single thread mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - CPU mark |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD PRO A12-9800 | AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - Single thread mark | 1686 | 2154 |
| PassMark - CPU mark | 3705 | 8512 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 26.268 | 42.509 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 279.396 | 393.562 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.975 | 3.082 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 34.196 | 49.002 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 131.8 | 208.928 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1176 | 1858 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 477 | 1994 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1715 | 5566 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1176 | 1858 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 477 | 1994 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1715 | 5566 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
| AMD PRO A12-9800 | AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G | |
|---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
| Family | AMD PRO A-Series Processors | AMD Ryzen PRO Processors |
| Startdatum | 3 October 2016 | 10 May 2018 |
| OPN Tray | AD980BAUM44AB | YD240BC5M4MFB |
| OS Support | Windows 10 - 64-Bit Edition, RHEL x86 64-Bit, Ubuntu x86 64-Bit | Windows 10 - 64-Bit Edition, RHEL x86 64-Bit, Ubuntu x86 64-Bit |
| Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 994 | 238 |
| Serie | AMD PRO A-Series A12 APU for Desktops | AMD Ryzen 5 PRO Desktop Processors with Radeon Vega Graphics |
| Vertikales Segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Architektur Codename | Raven Ridge | |
Leistung |
||
| Base frequency | 3.8 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
| Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 28 nm | 14 nm FinFET |
| Maximale Kerntemperatur | 90°C | 95°C |
| Maximale Frequenz | 4.2 GHz | 3.9 GHz |
| Anzahl der Adern | 4 | 4 |
| Number of GPU cores | 8 | 11 |
| Freigegeben | ||
| 64-Bit-Unterstützung | ||
| Compute Cores | 15 | |
| Matrizengröße | 210 mm | |
| L1 Cache | 384 KB | |
| L3 Cache | 4 MB | |
| Anzahl der Gewinde | 8 | |
| Anzahl der Transistoren | 4950 million | |
Speicher |
||
| Maximale Speicherkanäle | 2 | 2 |
| Supported memory frequency | 2400 MHz | 2933 MHz |
| Unterstützte Speichertypen | DDR4 | |
Grafik |
||
| Enduro | ||
| Grafik Maximalfrequenz | 1108 MHz | 1250 MHz |
| Prozessorgrafiken | R7 | Radeon Vega 11 Graphics |
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
| Video Codec Engine (VCE) | ||
| iGPU Kernzahl | 11 | |
Grafikschnittstellen |
||
| DisplayPort | ||
| HDMI | ||
Unterstützung der Grafik-API |
||
| DirectX | 12 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Kompatibilität |
||
| Unterstützte Sockel | AM4 | AM4 |
| Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 65 Watt | 65 Watt |
| Configurable TDP | 46-65 Watt | |
| Maximale Anzahl von CPUs in einer Konfiguration | 1 | |
| Thermal Solution | Wraith Stealth | |
Peripherien |
||
| PCI Express Revision | 3.0 | 3.0 |
Fortschrittliche Technologien |
||
| AMD Secure technology | ||
| Enhanced Virus Protection (EVP) | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| Fused Multiply-Add 4 (FMA4) | ||
| Intel® Advanced Vector Extensions (AVX) | ||
| Intel® AES New Instructions | ||
| Out-of-band client management | ||
| PowerGating | ||
| PowerNow | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| System Image Stability | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| AMD SenseMI | ||
| The "Zen" Core Architecture | ||
Virtualisierung |
||
| AMD Virtualization (AMD-V™) | ||
| IOMMU 2.0 | ||
Navigation
Wählen Sie eine CPU
Prozessoren
Vergleiche AMD PRO A12-9800 mit anderen
AMDPRO A12-9800 vs
IntelCore i5-2390T
AMDPRO A12-9800 vs
AMDA10-7860K
AMDPRO A12-9800 vs
IntelCeleron G3900T
AMDPRO A12-9800 vs
IntelCore i3-9300T
AMDPRO A12-9800 vs
AMDAthlon Gold PRO 3150G
AMDPRO A12-9800 vs
AMDRyzen 5 4500
