AMD Radeon R2 Graphics vs AMD Radeon R4 Graphics
Vergleichende Analyse von AMD Radeon R2 Graphics und AMD Radeon R4 Graphics Videokarten für alle bekannten Merkmale in den folgenden Kategorien: Essenzielles, Technische Info, Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse, Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen, API-Unterstützung, Speicher. Benchmark-Videokarten Leistungsanalyse: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, 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 Radeon R2 Graphics
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 8 Monat(e) später
- Etwa 23% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 16.121 vs 13.097
- Etwa 6% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 1912 vs 1811
- Etwa 6% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 1912 vs 1811
Spezifikationen | |
Startdatum | 27 February 2015 vs 11 June 2014 |
Benchmarks | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 16.121 vs 13.097 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1912 vs 1811 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1912 vs 1811 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der AMD Radeon R4 Graphics
- Etwa 14% höhere Kerntaktfrequenz:800 MHz vs 700 MHz
- Etwa 14% höhere Texturfüllrate: 6.4 GTexel / s vs 5.6 GTexel / s
- Etwa 14% bessere Gleitkomma-Leistung: 204.8 gflops vs 179.2 gflops
- Etwa 36% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 341 vs 250
- Etwa 48% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 99 vs 67
- Etwa 15% bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 8386 vs 7324
- Etwa 72% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 4.721 vs 2.751
- Etwa 15% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 107.613 vs 93.854
- Etwa 69% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.445 vs 0.263
- Etwa 68% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 10.612 vs 6.299
- Etwa 87% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 701 vs 375
- Etwa 4% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1338 vs 1282
- Etwa 87% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 701 vs 375
- Etwa 4% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1338 vs 1282
Spezifikationen | |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 800 MHz vs 700 MHz |
Texturfüllrate | 6.4 GTexel / s vs 5.6 GTexel / s |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 204.8 gflops vs 179.2 gflops |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 341 vs 250 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 99 vs 67 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 8386 vs 7324 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 4.721 vs 2.751 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 107.613 vs 93.854 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.445 vs 0.263 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 10.612 vs 6.299 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 701 vs 375 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1338 vs 1282 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 701 vs 375 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1338 vs 1282 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R2 Graphics
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R4 Graphics
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
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 Radeon R2 Graphics | AMD Radeon R4 Graphics |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 250 | 341 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 67 | 99 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 7324 | 8386 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 2.751 | 4.721 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 93.854 | 107.613 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.263 | 0.445 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 6.299 | 10.612 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 16.121 | 13.097 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 375 | 701 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1282 | 1338 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1912 | 1811 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 375 | 701 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1282 | 1338 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1912 | 1811 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
AMD Radeon R2 Graphics | AMD Radeon R4 Graphics | |
---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
Architektur | GCN 2.0 | GCN 2.0 |
Codename | Beema | Beema |
Startdatum | 27 February 2015 | 11 June 2014 |
Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 1591 | 1546 |
Typ | Desktop | Desktop |
Technische Info |
||
Kerntaktfrequenz | 700 MHz | 800 MHz |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 179.2 gflops | 204.8 gflops |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Leitungssysteme | 128 | 128 |
Texturfüllrate | 5.6 GTexel / s | 6.4 GTexel / s |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 15 Watt | 15 Watt |
Anzahl der Transistoren | 930 million | 930 million |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
Display-Anschlüsse | No outputs | No outputs |
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
Schnittstelle | IGP | IGP |
API-Unterstützung |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 12.0 (12_0) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Speicher |
||
Speichertyp | System Shared | System Shared |