AMD Radeon R2 Graphics vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 720
Vergleichende Analyse von AMD Radeon R2 Graphics und NVIDIA GeForce GT 720 Videokarten für alle bekannten Merkmale in den folgenden Kategorien: Essenzielles, Technische Info, Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse, Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen, API-Unterstützung, Speicher, Technologien. 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Unterschiede
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der AMD Radeon R2 Graphics
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 4 Monat(e) später
- Etwa 27% geringere typische Leistungsaufnahme: 15 Watt vs 19 Watt
- 3.3x bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 7324 vs 2224
- 4.6x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1282 vs 280
- 3.7x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 1912 vs 519
- 4.6x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1282 vs 280
- 3.7x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 1912 vs 519
| Spezifikationen | |
| Startdatum | 27 February 2015 vs 29 September 2014 |
| Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 19 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 7324 vs 2224 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1282 vs 280 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1912 vs 519 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1282 vs 280 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1912 vs 519 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der NVIDIA GeForce GT 720
- Etwa 14% höhere Kerntaktfrequenz:797 MHz vs 700 MHz
- 2.3x mehr Texturfüllrate: 12.75 GTexel / s vs 5.6 GTexel / s
- Etwa 50% höhere Leitungssysteme: 192 vs 128
- Etwa 71% bessere Gleitkomma-Leistung: 306.0 gflops vs 179.2 gflops
- 2.5x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 631 vs 250
- 3.1x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 208 vs 67
- Etwa 61% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 4.418 vs 2.751
- Etwa 52% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 142.734 vs 93.854
- Etwa 50% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.395 vs 0.263
- Etwa 30% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 8.158 vs 6.299
- Etwa 7% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 17.317 vs 16.121
- 2.4x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 895 vs 375
- 2.4x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 895 vs 375
| Spezifikationen | |
| Kerntaktfrequenz | 797 MHz vs 700 MHz |
| Texturfüllrate | 12.75 GTexel / s vs 5.6 GTexel / s |
| Leitungssysteme | 192 vs 128 |
| Gleitkomma-Leistung | 306.0 gflops vs 179.2 gflops |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 631 vs 250 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 208 vs 67 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 4.418 vs 2.751 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 142.734 vs 93.854 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.395 vs 0.263 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 8.158 vs 6.299 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 17.317 vs 16.121 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 895 vs 375 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 895 vs 375 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R2 Graphics
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 720
| 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 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 720 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 250 | 631 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 67 | 208 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 7324 | 2224 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 2.751 | 4.418 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 93.854 | 142.734 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.263 | 0.395 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 6.299 | 8.158 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 16.121 | 17.317 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 375 | 895 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1282 | 280 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1912 | 519 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 375 | 895 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1282 | 280 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1912 | 519 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
| AMD Radeon R2 Graphics | NVIDIA GeForce GT 720 | |
|---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
| Architektur | GCN 2.0 | Kepler 2.0 |
| Codename | Beema | GK208B |
| Startdatum | 27 February 2015 | 29 September 2014 |
| Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 1589 | 1590 |
| Typ | Desktop | Desktop |
| Einführungspreis (MSRP) | $49 | |
| Jetzt kaufen | $54.99 | |
| Preis-Leistungs-Verhältnis (0-100) | 15.44 | |
Technische Info |
||
| Kerntaktfrequenz | 700 MHz | 797 MHz |
| Gleitkomma-Leistung | 179.2 gflops | 306.0 gflops |
| Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Leitungssysteme | 128 | 192 |
| Texturfüllrate | 5.6 GTexel / s | 12.75 GTexel / s |
| Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 15 Watt | 19 Watt |
| Anzahl der Transistoren | 930 million | |
| CUDA-Kerne | 192 | |
| Maximale GPU-Temperatur | 98 °C | |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
| Display-Anschlüsse | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA, Dual Link DVI-DHDMIVGA |
| Audioeingang für HDMI | Internal | |
| HDCP | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Maximale VGA-Auflösung | 2048x1536 | |
| Multi-Monitor-Unterstützung | ||
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
| Schnittstelle | IGP | PCIe 2.0 x8 |
| Busunterstützung | PCI Express 2.0 | |
| Höhe | 2.713" (6.9 cm) | |
| Länge | 5.7" (14.5 cm) | |
| Zusätzliche Leistungssteckverbinder | None | |
API-Unterstützung |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
Speicher |
||
| Speichertyp | System Shared | DDR3 / GDDR5 |
| Maximale RAM-Belastung | 1 GB or 1 GB | |
| Speicherbandbreite | 14.4 (DDR3) or 40 (GDDR5) | |
| Breite des Speicherbusses | 64 Bit | |
| Speichertaktfrequenz | 900 MHz | |
Technologien |
||
| 3D Blu-Ray | ||
| 3D Gaming | ||
| 3D Vision | ||
| Adaptive VSync | ||
| CUDA | ||
| FXAA | ||
