AMD Radeon RX 5700 vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200
Vergleichende Analyse von AMD Radeon RX 5700 und AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 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
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 10 Monat(e) später
- Etwa 22% höhere Kerntaktfrequenz:1465 MHz vs 1200 MHz
- Etwa 13% höhere Boost-Taktfrequenz: 1725 MHz vs 1530 MHz
- Etwa 28% geringere typische Leistungsaufnahme: 180 Watt vs 230 Watt
- Etwa 4% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 14499 vs 13932
- Etwa 9% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 889 vs 815
- Etwa 22% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 209.509 vs 171.616
- Etwa 30% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 21.941 vs 16.925
- Etwa 1% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 250 vs 247.788
Spezifikationen | |
Startdatum | 7 July 2019 vs 13 August 2018 |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 1465 MHz vs 1200 MHz |
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1725 MHz vs 1530 MHz |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 180 Watt vs 230 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 14499 vs 13932 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 889 vs 815 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 209.509 vs 171.616 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 21.941 vs 16.925 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 250 vs 247.788 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200
- Etwa 5% bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 69812 vs 66234
- Etwa 9% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 4031.404 vs 3686.851
- Etwa 15% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 1195.863 vs 1036.448
- Etwa 13% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 13044 vs 11536
- Etwa 92% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 7164 vs 3723
- 9.2x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 30936 vs 3366
- Etwa 13% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 13044 vs 11536
- Etwa 92% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 7164 vs 3723
- 9.2x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 30936 vs 3366
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 69812 vs 66234 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 4031.404 vs 3686.851 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1195.863 vs 1036.448 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 13044 vs 11536 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 7164 vs 3723 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 30936 vs 3366 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 13044 vs 11536 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 7164 vs 3723 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 30936 vs 3366 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: AMD Radeon RX 5700
GPU 2: AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200
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 | AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 14499 | 13932 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 889 | 815 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 66234 | 69812 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 209.509 | 171.616 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3686.851 | 4031.404 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 21.941 | 16.925 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 250 | 247.788 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1036.448 | 1195.863 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 11536 | 13044 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3723 | 7164 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3366 | 30936 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 11536 | 13044 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3723 | 7164 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3366 | 30936 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 8500 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
AMD Radeon RX 5700 | AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 | |
---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
Architektur | RDNA | GCN 5.0 |
Codename | Navi 10 | Vega 10 |
Startdatum | 7 July 2019 | 13 August 2018 |
Einführungspreis (MSRP) | $350 | $999 |
Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 177 | 118 |
Typ | Desktop | Workstation |
Jetzt kaufen | $999 | |
Preis-Leistungs-Verhältnis (0-100) | 13.37 | |
Technische Info |
||
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1725 MHz | 1530 MHz |
Berechnungseinheiten | 36 | |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 1465 MHz | 1200 MHz |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 15.9 TFLOPs | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 7.95 TFLOPs | |
Pixel fill rate | 110.4 GP/s | |
Render output units | 64 | |
Stream Processors | 2304 | |
Texturfüllrate | 248.4 GT/s | |
Texture Units | 144 | |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 180 Watt | 230 Watt |
Anzahl der Transistoren | 10.3 B | 12,500 million |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 14 nm | |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
DisplayPort-Unterstützung | ||
HDMI | ||
Display-Anschlüsse | 4x mini-DisplayPort | |
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
Empfohlene Systemleistung (PSU) | 600 Watt | |
Zusätzliche Leistungssteckverbinder | 1 x 8-pin and 1x6 pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
Schnittstelle | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
Länge | 267 mm | |
API-Unterstützung |
||
DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (12_1) |
Vulkan | ||
OpenGL | 4.6 | |
Speicher |
||
Maximale RAM-Belastung | 8 GB | |
Speicherbandbreite | 448 GB/s | |
Breite des Speicherbusses | 256 bit | |
Speichertyp | GDDR6 | |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 2000 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 |