Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M
Vergleichende Analyse von Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4 und NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M 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 7 Jahr(e) 5 Monat(e) später
- Etwa 12% höhere Boost-Taktfrequenz: 1100 MHz vs 980 MHz
- 3367.3x mehr Texturfüllrate: 52.80 GTexel/s vs 15.68 GTexel / s
- Ein neuerer Herstellungsprozess ermöglicht eine leistungsfähigere, aber dennoch kühlere Grafikkarte: 10 nm vs 28 nm
- 3x geringere typische Leistungsaufnahme: 15 Watt vs 45 Watt
- 3.4x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2666 vs 793
- 2.6x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 383 vs 149
- 3.1x bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 11991 vs 3866
- 8.5x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 79.859 vs 9.392
- 7.2x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1137.615 vs 157.479
- 5.3x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 4.569 vs 0.864
- 3.8x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 61.688 vs 16.101
- 4.3x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 192.566 vs 44.77
- 3.5x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5609 vs 1589
- Etwa 15% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3708 vs 3235
- Etwa 1% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3356 vs 3339
- 3.5x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5609 vs 1589
- Etwa 15% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3708 vs 3235
- Etwa 1% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3356 vs 3339
Spezifikationen | |
Startdatum | 2 Sep 2020 vs 1 April 2013 |
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1100 MHz vs 980 MHz |
Texturfüllrate | 52.80 GTexel/s vs 15.68 GTexel / s |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 10 nm vs 28 nm |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 45 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2666 vs 793 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 383 vs 149 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 11991 vs 3866 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 79.859 vs 9.392 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1137.615 vs 157.479 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.569 vs 0.864 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 61.688 vs 16.101 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 192.566 vs 44.77 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5609 vs 1589 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3708 vs 3235 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 vs 3339 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5609 vs 1589 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3708 vs 3235 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 vs 3339 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M
- 2.7x mehr Kerntaktfrequenz: 810 MHz vs 300 MHz
Kerntaktfrequenz | 810 MHz vs 300 MHz |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M
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 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2666 | 793 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 383 | 149 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 11991 | 3866 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 79.859 | 9.392 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1137.615 | 157.479 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.569 | 0.864 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 61.688 | 16.101 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 192.566 | 44.77 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5609 | 1589 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3708 | 3235 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 | 3339 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5609 | 1589 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3708 | 3235 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 | 3339 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 345 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M | |
---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
Architektur | Generation 12.0 | Kepler |
Codename | Tiger Lake GT1 | GK107 |
Startdatum | 2 Sep 2020 | 1 April 2013 |
Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 594 | 1301 |
Typ | Laptop | Laptop |
Technische Info |
||
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1100 MHz | 980 MHz |
Berechnungseinheiten | 48 | |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 300 MHz | 810 MHz |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 10 nm | 28 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 | 384 |
Pixel fill rate | 13.20 GPixel/s | |
Texturfüllrate | 52.80 GTexel/s | 15.68 GTexel / s |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 15 Watt | 45 Watt |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 752.6 gflops | |
Anzahl der Transistoren | 1,270 million | |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
Display-Anschlüsse | No outputs | No outputs |
7.1-Kanal HD-Audio auf HDMI | ||
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) Unterstützung | Up to 3840x2160 | |
eDP 1.2 Signalunterstützung | Up to 3840x2160 | |
HDCP-Inhaltsschutz | ||
HDMI | ||
Unterstützung von LVDS-Signalen | Up to 1920x1200 | |
TrueHD und DTS-HD Audio Bitstreaming | ||
VGA аnalog Display-Unterstützung | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
Schnittstelle | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Breite | IGP | |
Busunterstützung | PCI Express 3.0 | |
Laptop-Größe | medium sized | |
API-Unterstützung |
||
DirectX | 12.1 | 12 API |
OpenCL | 2.1 | 1.1 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Shader Model | 6.4 | |
Vulkan | ||
Speicher |
||
Maximale RAM-Belastung | 2 GB | |
Speicherbandbreite | 14.4 GB / s | |
Breite des Speicherbusses | 64 / 128 Bit | |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 1802 MHz | |
Speichertyp | DDR3 | |
Gemeinsamer Speicher | 0 | |
Standard-Speicherkonfiguration | DDR3 / GDDR5 | |
Technologien |
||
3D Vision | ||
3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
Blu-Ray 3D Support | ||
CUDA | ||
Direct Compute | ||
FXAA | ||
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
Optimus |