AMD Radeon R5 430 OEM vs NVIDIA GeForce 930M
Vergleichende Analyse von AMD Radeon R5 430 OEM und NVIDIA GeForce 930M 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 R5 430 OEM
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 1 Jahr(e) 3 Monat(e) später
- 2x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 304 vs 150
- Etwa 8% bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 5684 vs 5258
- Etwa 52% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 253.178 vs 166.907
- Etwa 19% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 23.777 vs 19.899
| Spezifikationen | |
| Startdatum | 30 June 2016 vs 13 March 2015 |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 304 vs 150 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5684 vs 5258 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 253.178 vs 166.907 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 23.777 vs 19.899 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der NVIDIA GeForce 930M
- Etwa 27% höhere Kerntaktfrequenz:928 MHz vs 730 MHz
- Etwa 21% höhere Boost-Taktfrequenz: 941 MHz vs 780 MHz
- Etwa 21% höhere Texturfüllrate: 22.58 GTexel / s vs 18.72 GTexel / s
- Etwa 21% bessere Gleitkomma-Leistung: 722.7 gflops vs 599.0 gflops
- Etwa 52% geringere typische Leistungsaufnahme: 33 Watt vs 50 Watt
- Etwa 13% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1012 vs 896
- Etwa 84% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 22.344 vs 12.111
- Etwa 1% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.225 vs 1.211
- Etwa 15% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 84.246 vs 73.506
- Etwa 21% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1987 vs 1645
- Etwa 53% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3706 vs 2426
- 2x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3356 vs 1677
- Etwa 21% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1987 vs 1645
- Etwa 53% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3706 vs 2426
- 2x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3356 vs 1677
| Spezifikationen | |
| Kerntaktfrequenz | 928 MHz vs 730 MHz |
| Boost-Taktfrequenz | 941 MHz vs 780 MHz |
| Texturfüllrate | 22.58 GTexel / s vs 18.72 GTexel / s |
| Gleitkomma-Leistung | 722.7 gflops vs 599.0 gflops |
| Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 33 Watt vs 50 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1012 vs 896 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 22.344 vs 12.111 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.225 vs 1.211 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 84.246 vs 73.506 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1987 vs 1645 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3706 vs 2426 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 vs 1677 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1987 vs 1645 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3706 vs 2426 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 vs 1677 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R5 430 OEM
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 930M
| 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 R5 430 OEM | NVIDIA GeForce 930M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 896 | 1012 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 304 | 150 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5684 | 5258 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 12.111 | 22.344 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 253.178 | 166.907 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.211 | 1.225 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 23.777 | 19.899 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 73.506 | 84.246 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1645 | 1987 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2426 | 3706 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1677 | 3356 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1645 | 1987 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2426 | 3706 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1677 | 3356 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
| AMD Radeon R5 430 OEM | NVIDIA GeForce 930M | |
|---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
| Architektur | GCN 1.0 | Maxwell |
| Codename | Oland | GM108 |
| Startdatum | 30 June 2016 | 13 March 2015 |
| Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 1199 | 1202 |
| Typ | Desktop | Laptop |
Technische Info |
||
| Boost-Taktfrequenz | 780 MHz | 941 MHz |
| Kerntaktfrequenz | 730 MHz | 928 MHz |
| Gleitkomma-Leistung | 599.0 gflops | 722.7 gflops |
| Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Leitungssysteme | 384 | 384 |
| Texturfüllrate | 18.72 GTexel / s | 22.58 GTexel / s |
| Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 50 Watt | 33 Watt |
| Anzahl der Transistoren | 1,040 million | |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
| Display-Anschlüsse | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA | No outputs |
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
| Schnittstelle | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Zusätzliche Leistungssteckverbinder | None | None |
| Busunterstützung | PCI Express 3.0 | |
API-Unterstützung |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Speicher |
||
| Maximale RAM-Belastung | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Speicherbandbreite | 28.8 GB / s | 14.4 GB / s |
| Breite des Speicherbusses | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Speichertaktfrequenz | 1800 MHz | 1800 MHz |
| Speichertyp | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Gemeinsamer Speicher | 0 | |
Technologien |
||
| CUDA | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| Optimus | ||
