Intel UHD Graphics 600 vs Intel UHD Graphics 605
Vergleichende Analyse von Intel UHD Graphics 600 und Intel UHD Graphics 605 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 UHD Graphics 600
- Etwa 40% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 5.952 vs 4.247
- Etwa 8% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 56.77 vs 52.728
- Etwa 37% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.427 vs 0.312
- Etwa 75% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 5.876 vs 3.355
- Etwa 63% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 6.882 vs 4.219
Benchmarks | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 5.952 vs 4.247 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 56.77 vs 52.728 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.427 vs 0.312 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 5.876 vs 3.355 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 6.882 vs 4.219 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der Intel UHD Graphics 605
- Etwa 7% höhere Boost-Taktfrequenz: 800 MHz vs 750 MHz
- Etwa 50% höhere Leitungssysteme: 18 vs 12
- Etwa 16% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 369 vs 318
- Etwa 15% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 106 vs 92
- Etwa 45% bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 1458 vs 1004
- Etwa 52% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 724 vs 476
- Etwa 64% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1643 vs 1000
- Etwa 15% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 1961 vs 1701
- Etwa 52% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 724 vs 476
- Etwa 64% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1643 vs 1000
- Etwa 15% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 1961 vs 1701
Spezifikationen | |
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 800 MHz vs 750 MHz |
Leitungssysteme | 18 vs 12 |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 369 vs 318 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 106 vs 92 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 1458 vs 1004 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 724 vs 476 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1643 vs 1000 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1961 vs 1701 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 724 vs 476 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1643 vs 1000 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1961 vs 1701 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: Intel UHD Graphics 600
GPU 2: Intel UHD Graphics 605
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 UHD Graphics 600 | Intel UHD Graphics 605 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 318 | 369 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 92 | 106 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 1004 | 1458 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 5.952 | 4.247 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 56.77 | 52.728 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.427 | 0.312 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 5.876 | 3.355 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 6.882 | 4.219 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 476 | 724 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1000 | 1643 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1701 | 1961 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 476 | 724 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1000 | 1643 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1701 | 1961 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
Intel UHD Graphics 600 | Intel UHD Graphics 605 | |
---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
Architektur | Generation 9.5 | Generation 9.5 |
Codename | Gemini Lake GT1 | Gemini Lake GT1 |
Startdatum | 11 December 2017 | 11 December 2017 |
Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 1624 | 1550 |
Typ | Laptop | Laptop |
Technische Info |
||
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 750 MHz | 800 MHz |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 200 MHz | 200 MHz |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 14 nm | 14 nm |
Leitungssysteme | 12 | 18 |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 5 Watt | 5 Watt |
Anzahl der Transistoren | 189 million | 189 million |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
Display-Anschlüsse | No outputs | No outputs |
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
Schnittstelle | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 3.0 x1 |
API-Unterstützung |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (12_1) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Speicher |
||
Breite des Speicherbusses | 64 / 128 Bit | 64 / 128 Bit |
Speichertyp | DDR4 / LPDDR4 | DDR4 / LPDDR4 |
Gemeinsamer Speicher | 1 | 1 |
Technologien |
||
Quick Sync |