Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4 vs ATI Radeon HD 5870
Vergleichende Analyse von Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4 und ATI Radeon HD 5870 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 Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 10 Jahr(e) 11 Monat(e) später
- Etwa 29% höhere Boost-Taktfrequenz: 1100 MHz vs 850 MHz
- 776.5x mehr Texturfüllrate: 52.80 GTexel/s vs 68.0 GTexel / s
- Ein neuerer Herstellungsprozess ermöglicht eine leistungsfähigere, aber dennoch kühlere Grafikkarte: 10 nm vs 40 nm
- 12.5x geringere typische Leistungsaufnahme: 15 Watt vs 188 Watt
- Etwa 21% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2666 vs 2199
- 6.5x bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 11991 vs 1858
- 4.3x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 79.859 vs 18.789
- 2.6x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 4.569 vs 1.775
- Etwa 42% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 61.688 vs 43.496
- Etwa 24% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5609 vs 4541
- Etwa 1% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3708 vs 3671
- Etwa 24% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5609 vs 4541
- Etwa 1% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3708 vs 3671
| Spezifikationen | |
| Startdatum | 2 Sep 2020 vs 23 September 2009 |
| Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1100 MHz vs 850 MHz |
| Texturfüllrate | 52.80 GTexel/s vs 68.0 GTexel / s |
| Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 10 nm vs 40 nm |
| Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 188 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2666 vs 2199 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 11991 vs 1858 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 79.859 vs 18.789 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.569 vs 1.775 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 61.688 vs 43.496 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5609 vs 4541 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3708 vs 3671 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 vs 3349 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5609 vs 4541 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3708 vs 3671 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 vs 3349 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der ATI Radeon HD 5870
- 2.8x mehr Kerntaktfrequenz: 850 MHz vs 300 MHz
- 4.2x mehr Leitungssysteme: 1600 vs 384
- Etwa 9% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 416 vs 383
- Etwa 18% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1339.688 vs 1137.615
- Etwa 28% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 245.813 vs 192.566
| Spezifikationen | |
| Kerntaktfrequenz | 850 MHz vs 300 MHz |
| Leitungssysteme | 1600 vs 384 |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 416 vs 383 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1339.688 vs 1137.615 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 245.813 vs 192.566 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4
GPU 2: ATI Radeon HD 5870
| 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 | Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4 | ATI Radeon HD 5870 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2666 | 2199 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 383 | 416 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 11991 | 1858 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 79.859 | 18.789 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1137.615 | 1339.688 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.569 | 1.775 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 61.688 | 43.496 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 192.566 | 245.813 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5609 | 4541 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3708 | 3671 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 | 3349 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5609 | 4541 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3708 | 3671 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 | 3349 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
| Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4 | ATI Radeon HD 5870 | |
|---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
| Architektur | Generation 12.0 | TeraScale 2 |
| Codename | Tiger Lake GT1 | Cypress |
| Startdatum | 2 Sep 2020 | 23 September 2009 |
| Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 594 | 770 |
| Typ | Laptop | Desktop |
| Design | ATI Radeon HD 5000 Series | |
| Einführungspreis (MSRP) | $399 | |
Technische Info |
||
| Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1100 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Berechnungseinheiten | 48 | |
| Kerntaktfrequenz | 300 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 10 nm | 40 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 211.2 GFLOPS | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 1.690 TFLOPS | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 844.8 GFLOPS | |
| Leitungssysteme | 384 | 1600 |
| Pixel-Füllrate | 13.20 GPixel/s | |
| Texturfüllrate | 52.80 GTexel/s | 68.0 GTexel / s |
| Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 15 Watt | 188 Watt |
| Gleitkomma-Leistung | 2,720.0 gflops | |
| Anzahl der Transistoren | 2,154 million | |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
| Display-Anschlüsse | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| DisplayPort-Unterstützung | ||
| Dual-Link-DVI-Unterstützung | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
| Schnittstelle | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Breite | IGP | |
| Länge | 282 mm | |
| Zusätzliche Leistungssteckverbinder | 2x 6-pin | |
API-Unterstützung |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 11 |
| OpenCL | 2.1 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Speicher |
||
| Maximale RAM-Belastung | 1 GB | |
| Speicherbandbreite | 153.6 GB / s | |
| Breite des Speicherbusses | 256 Bit | |
| Speichertaktfrequenz | 4800 MHz | |
| Speichertyp | GDDR5 | |
Technologien |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||

