AMD Radeon R9 270X vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN
Vergleichende Analyse von AMD Radeon R9 270X und NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN 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, 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, Geekbench - OpenCL.
Unterschiede
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der AMD Radeon R9 270X
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 7 Monat(e) später
- Etwa 20% höhere Boost-Taktfrequenz: 1050 MHz vs 876 MHz
- Etwa 39% geringere typische Leistungsaufnahme: 180 Watt vs 250 Watt
- Etwa 3% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 63.87 vs 62.027
- Etwa 8% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1314.72 vs 1218.137
- Etwa 9% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 6.354 vs 5.835
- 2.3x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 85.21 vs 36.842
- Etwa 46% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 315.412 vs 215.546
Spezifikationen | |
Startdatum | 8 October 2013 vs 19 February 2013 |
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1050 MHz vs 876 MHz |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 180 Watt vs 250 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 63.87 vs 62.027 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1314.72 vs 1218.137 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.354 vs 5.835 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 85.21 vs 36.842 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 315.412 vs 215.546 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN
- 2.2x mehr Texturfüllrate: 187.5 billion / sec vs 84 GTexel / s
- 2.1x mehr Leitungssysteme: 2688 vs 1280
- Etwa 75% bessere Gleitkomma-Leistung: 4,709 gflops vs 2,688 gflops
- 3x mehr maximale Speichergröße: 6 GB vs 2 GB
- Etwa 68% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 8190 vs 4889
- Etwa 3% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 630 vs 611
- Etwa 26% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 10176 vs 8068
- Etwa 26% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 10176 vs 8068
- Etwa 64% bessere Leistung in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 2901 vs 1771
Spezifikationen | |
Texturfüllrate | 187.5 billion / sec vs 84 GTexel / s |
Leitungssysteme | 2688 vs 1280 |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 4,709 gflops vs 2,688 gflops |
Maximale Speichergröße | 6 GB vs 2 GB |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 8190 vs 4889 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 630 vs 611 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10176 vs 8068 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 vs 3706 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 vs 3350 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10176 vs 8068 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 vs 3706 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 vs 3350 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2901 vs 1771 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 270X
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D 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) |
|
|
||||
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon R9 270X | NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 4889 | 8190 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 611 | 630 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 63.87 | 62.027 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1314.72 | 1218.137 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.354 | 5.835 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 85.21 | 36.842 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 315.412 | 215.546 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8068 | 10176 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3706 | 3715 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3350 | 3356 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8068 | 10176 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3706 | 3715 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3350 | 3356 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1771 | 2901 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 23870 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
AMD Radeon R9 270X | NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN | |
---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
Architektur | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |
Codename | Curacao | GK110 |
Design | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
Startdatum | 8 October 2013 | 19 February 2013 |
Einführungspreis (MSRP) | $199 | $999 |
Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 439 | 428 |
Jetzt kaufen | $399 | $2,054.59 |
Typ | Desktop | Desktop |
Preis-Leistungs-Verhältnis (0-100) | 16.05 | 5.09 |
Technische Info |
||
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1050 MHz | 876 MHz |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 2,688 gflops | 4,709 gflops |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Leitungssysteme | 1280 | 2688 |
Stream Processors | 1280 | |
Texturfüllrate | 84 GTexel / s | 187.5 billion / sec |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 180 Watt | 250 Watt |
Anzahl der Transistoren | 2,800 million | 7,080 million |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 837 MHz | |
CUDA-Kerne | 2688 | |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
Display-Anschlüsse | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort, One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI... |
DisplayPort-Unterstützung | ||
Dual-Link-DVI-Unterstützung | ||
Eyefinity | ||
HDMI | ||
VGA | ||
Audioeingang für HDMI | Internal | |
G-SYNC-Unterstützung | ||
HDCP | ||
Maximale VGA-Auflösung | 2048x1536 | |
Multi-Monitor-Unterstützung | ||
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
Busunterstützung | PCIe 3.0 | PCI Express 3.0 |
Schnittstelle | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Zusätzliche Leistungssteckverbinder | 2 x 6-pin | One 8-pin and one 6-pin |
Höhe | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
Länge | 10.5" (26.7 cm) | |
API-Unterstützung |
||
DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
Vulkan | ||
Speicher |
||
Maximale RAM-Belastung | 2 GB | 6 GB |
Speicherbandbreite | 179.2 GB/s | 288.4 GB / s |
Breite des Speicherbusses | 256 Bit | 384-bit GDDR5 |
Speichertyp | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Gemeinsamer Speicher | 0 | |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 6.0 GB/s | |
Technologien |
||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
AppAcceleration | ||
CrossFire | ||
DDMA audio | ||
FreeSync | ||
HD3D | ||
LiquidVR | ||
TressFX | ||
TrueAudio | ||
Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
3D Gaming | ||
3D Vision | ||
3D Vision Live | ||
Adaptive VSync | ||
Blu Ray 3D | ||
CUDA | ||
FXAA | ||
GPU Boost | ||
TXAA |