AMD Radeon R7 Graphics vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750
Vergleichende Analyse von AMD Radeon R7 Graphics und NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 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: 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, PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark.
Unterschiede
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der AMD Radeon R7 Graphics
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 2 Jahr(e) 3 Monat(e) später
- 3.7x geringere typische Leistungsaufnahme: 15 Watt vs 55 Watt
- 2.4x bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 22612 vs 9306
- Etwa 22% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 85.46 vs 69.814
- Etwa 39% bessere Leistung in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1457 vs 1050
| Spezifikationen | |
| Startdatum | 31 May 2016 vs 18 February 2014 |
| Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 55 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 22612 vs 9306 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 85.46 vs 69.814 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 3346 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1457 vs 1050 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750
- 5.1x mehr Kerntaktfrequenz: 1020 MHz vs 200 MHz
- Etwa 43% höhere Boost-Taktfrequenz: 1085 MHz vs 758 MHz
- 2.1x mehr Texturfüllrate: 34.72 GTexel / s vs 16.46 GTexel / s
- Etwa 33% höhere Leitungssysteme: 512 vs 384
- 2.1x bessere Gleitkomma-Leistung: 1,111 gflops vs 526.8 gflops
- 2.3x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 34.239 vs 15.145
- 3.1x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 639.427 vs 206.354
- Etwa 95% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.341 vs 1.2
- Etwa 33% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 32 vs 24.15
- 2.3x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4498 vs 1979
- Etwa 76% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3704 vs 2101
- 134.3x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4498 vs 33.5
- 109.3x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3704 vs 33.9
- 55.8x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3346 vs 60
| Spezifikationen | |
| Kerntaktfrequenz | 1020 MHz vs 200 MHz |
| Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1085 MHz vs 758 MHz |
| Texturfüllrate | 34.72 GTexel / s vs 16.46 GTexel / s |
| Leitungssysteme | 512 vs 384 |
| Gleitkomma-Leistung | 1,111 gflops vs 526.8 gflops |
| Benchmarks | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 34.239 vs 15.145 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 639.427 vs 206.354 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.341 vs 1.2 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 32 vs 24.15 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4498 vs 1979 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3704 vs 2101 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4498 vs 33.5 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3704 vs 33.9 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3346 vs 60 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 Graphics
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750
| 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 |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon R7 Graphics | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 |
|---|---|---|
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 22612 | 9306 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 15.145 | 34.239 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 206.354 | 639.427 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.2 | 2.341 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 24.15 | 32 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 85.46 | 69.814 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1979 | 4498 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2101 | 3704 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3346 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 33.5 | 4498 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 33.9 | 3704 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 60 | 3346 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1457 | 1050 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3337 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 515 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
| AMD Radeon R7 Graphics | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 | |
|---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
| Architektur | GCN 3.0 | Maxwell |
| Codename | Wani | GM107 |
| Startdatum | 31 May 2016 | 18 February 2014 |
| Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 1435 | 724 |
| Typ | Desktop | Desktop |
| Einführungspreis (MSRP) | $119 | |
| Jetzt kaufen | $150.99 | |
| Preis-Leistungs-Verhältnis (0-100) | 27.54 | |
Technische Info |
||
| Boost-Taktfrequenz | 758 MHz | 1085 MHz |
| Kerntaktfrequenz | 200 MHz | 1020 MHz |
| Gleitkomma-Leistung | 526.8 gflops | 1,111 gflops |
| Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Leitungssysteme | 384 | 512 |
| Texturfüllrate | 16.46 GTexel / s | 34.72 GTexel / s |
| Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 15 Watt | 55 Watt |
| Anzahl der Transistoren | 2,410 million | 1,870 million |
| CUDA-Kerne | 512 | |
| Maximale GPU-Temperatur | 95 °C | |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
| Display-Anschlüsse | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI, One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One mini... |
| Audioeingang für HDMI | Internal | |
| G-SYNC-Unterstützung | ||
| HDCP | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Maximale VGA-Auflösung | 2048x1536 | |
| Multi-Monitor-Unterstützung | ||
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
| Schnittstelle | IGP | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Busunterstützung | PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Höhe | 4.376" (11.1 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 | GDDR5 |
| Maximale RAM-Belastung | 1 GB | |
| Speicherbandbreite | 80 GB / s | |
| Breite des Speicherbusses | 128 Bit | |
| Speichertaktfrequenz | 5.0 GB/s | |
Technologien |
||
| 3D Gaming | ||
| 3D Vision | ||
| 3D Vision Live | ||
| Adaptive VSync | ||
| Blu Ray 3D | ||
| CUDA | ||
| FXAA | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| TXAA | ||

