AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT vs AMD Radeon Pro Duo
Vergleichende Analyse von AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT und AMD Radeon Pro Duo 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 RX 5700 XT
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 3 Jahr(e) 2 Monat(e) später
- Etwa 91% höhere Boost-Taktfrequenz: 1905 MHz vs 1000 MHz
- Etwa 56% geringere typische Leistungsaufnahme: 225 Watt vs 350 Watt
- 2x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 16664 vs 8137
- Etwa 24% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 927 vs 745
- Etwa 43% bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 77147 vs 53806
- Etwa 79% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 252.601 vs 141.474
- Etwa 9% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 3949.565 vs 3621.344
- Etwa 89% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 24.769 vs 13.132
- 2.3x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 254.777 vs 112.973
- Etwa 65% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 1322.129 vs 799.933
- Etwa 45% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 14699 vs 10141
- Etwa 45% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 14699 vs 10141
Spezifikationen | |
Startdatum | 7 July 2019 vs 26 April 2016 |
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1905 MHz vs 1000 MHz |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 225 Watt vs 350 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 16664 vs 8137 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 927 vs 745 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 77147 vs 53806 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 252.601 vs 141.474 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3949.565 vs 3621.344 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 24.769 vs 13.132 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 254.777 vs 112.973 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1322.129 vs 799.933 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 14699 vs 10141 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3720 vs 3713 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 14699 vs 10141 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3720 vs 3713 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der AMD Radeon Pro Duo
- 7.4x mehr Texturfüllrate: 2x 256.0 GTexel / s billion / sec vs 304.8 GT/s
- 11.4x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 38251 vs 3369
- 11.4x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 38251 vs 3369
Spezifikationen | |
Texturfüllrate | 2x 256.0 GTexel / s billion / sec vs 304.8 GT/s |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 38251 vs 3369 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 38251 vs 3369 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT
GPU 2: AMD Radeon Pro Duo
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 RX 5700 XT | AMD Radeon Pro Duo |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 16664 | 8137 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 927 | 745 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 77147 | 53806 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 252.601 | 141.474 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3949.565 | 3621.344 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 24.769 | 13.132 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 254.777 | 112.973 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1322.129 | 799.933 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 14699 | 10141 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3720 | 3713 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3369 | 38251 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 14699 | 10141 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3720 | 3713 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3369 | 38251 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 9486 | 0 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT | AMD Radeon Pro Duo | |
---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
Architektur | RDNA | GCN 3.0 |
Codename | Navi 10 | Capsaicin |
Startdatum | 7 July 2019 | 26 April 2016 |
Einführungspreis (MSRP) | $400 | $1,499 |
Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 148 | 188 |
Typ | Desktop | Workstation |
Design | reference | |
Jetzt kaufen | $849 | |
Preis-Leistungs-Verhältnis (0-100) | 17.05 | |
Technische Info |
||
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1905 MHz | 1000 MHz |
Berechnungseinheiten | 40 | 128 |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 1605 MHz | |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 19.51 TFLOPs | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 9.75 TFLOPs | |
Pixel fill rate | 121.9 GP/s | |
Render output units | 64 | |
Stream Processors | 2560 | |
Texturfüllrate | 304.8 GT/s | 2x 256.0 GTexel / s billion / sec |
Texture Units | 160 | |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 225 Watt | 350 Watt |
Anzahl der Transistoren | 10.3 B | 8,900 million |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 2x 8,192 gflops | |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 28 nm | |
Leitungssysteme | 2x 4096 | |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
DisplayPort-Unterstützung | ||
HDMI | ||
Display-Anschlüsse | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort | |
Eyefinity | ||
Anzahl der Eyefinity-Displays | 6 | |
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
Empfohlene Systemleistung (PSU) | 600 Watt | |
Zusätzliche Leistungssteckverbinder | 1 x 8-pin and 1x6 pin | 3x 8-pin |
Busunterstützung | PCIe 3.0 | |
Schnittstelle | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
Länge | 277 mm | |
API-Unterstützung |
||
DirectX | 12 | DirectX® 12 |
Vulkan | ||
Mantle | ||
OpenCL | 2.0 | |
OpenGL | 4.5 | |
Speicher |
||
Maximale RAM-Belastung | 8 GB | 8 GB |
Speicherbandbreite | 448 GB/s | 512 GB / s |
Breite des Speicherbusses | 256 bit | 2x 4096 Bit |
Speichertyp | GDDR6 | High Bandwidth Memory (HBM) |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 500 MHz | |
Technologien |
||
4K H264 Decode | ||
4K H264 Encode | ||
DisplayPort 1.3 HBR / 1.4 HDR Ready | ||
FreeSync | ||
H265/HEVC Decode | ||
H265/HEVC Encode | ||
HDMI 4K Support | ||
TrueAudio | ||
Virtual Super Resolution (VSR) | ||
VR Ready | ||
AppAcceleration | ||
CrossFire | ||
Enduro | ||
FRTC | ||
HD3D | ||
LiquidVR | ||
PowerTune | ||
TressFX | ||
Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
ZeroCore |