Intel UHD Graphics 620 vs AMD Radeon RX 580
Vergleichende Analyse von Intel UHD Graphics 620 und AMD Radeon RX 580 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 620
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 4 Monat(e) später
- 12.3x geringere typische Leistungsaufnahme: 15 Watt vs 185 Watt
- 4x mehr maximale Speichergröße: 32 GB vs 8 GB
Startdatum | 1 September 2017 vs 18 April 2017 |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 185 Watt |
Maximale Speichergröße | 32 GB vs 8 GB |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der AMD Radeon RX 580
- 4.2x mehr Kerntaktfrequenz: 1257 MHz vs 300 MHz
- Etwa 17% höhere Boost-Taktfrequenz: 1340 MHz vs 1150 MHz
- 96x mehr Leitungssysteme: 2304 vs 24
- 8.5x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 8827 vs 1042
- 3.2x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 767 vs 241
- 8.5x bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 39028 vs 4592
- 4.3x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 116.142 vs 27.062
- 3.7x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1022.932 vs 273.504
- 5.2x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 9.235 vs 1.777
- 4.2x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 84.034 vs 19.939
- 19.1x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 607.721 vs 31.881
- 8.1x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 11281 vs 1397
- 4.2x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3695 vs 878
- Etwa 50% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3349 vs 2227
- 8.1x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 11281 vs 1397
- 4.2x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3695 vs 878
- Etwa 50% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3349 vs 2227
- 16.2x bessere Leistung in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1005 vs 62
Spezifikationen | |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 1257 MHz vs 300 MHz |
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1340 MHz vs 1150 MHz |
Leitungssysteme | 2304 vs 24 |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 8827 vs 1042 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 767 vs 241 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 39028 vs 4592 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 116.142 vs 27.062 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1022.932 vs 273.504 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 9.235 vs 1.777 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 84.034 vs 19.939 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 607.721 vs 31.881 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 11281 vs 1397 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3695 vs 878 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3349 vs 2227 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 11281 vs 1397 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3695 vs 878 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3349 vs 2227 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1005 vs 62 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: Intel UHD Graphics 620
GPU 2: AMD Radeon RX 580
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 |
|
|
Name | Intel UHD Graphics 620 | AMD Radeon RX 580 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1042 | 8827 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 241 | 767 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 4592 | 39028 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 27.062 | 116.142 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 273.504 | 1022.932 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.777 | 9.235 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 19.939 | 84.034 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 31.881 | 607.721 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1397 | 11281 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 878 | 3695 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2227 | 3349 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1397 | 11281 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 878 | 3695 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2227 | 3349 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 62 | 1005 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
Intel UHD Graphics 620 | AMD Radeon RX 580 | |
---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
Architektur | Generation 9.5 | GCN 4.0 |
Codename | Kaby Lake GT2 | Polaris 20 |
Startdatum | 1 September 2017 | 18 April 2017 |
Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 1380 | 341 |
Typ | Laptop | Desktop |
Design | Radeon RX 500 Series | |
GCN-Generierung | 4th Gen | |
Einführungspreis (MSRP) | $229 | |
Jetzt kaufen | $169.99 | |
Preis-Leistungs-Verhältnis (0-100) | 76.21 | |
Technische Info |
||
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1150 MHz | 1340 MHz |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 300 MHz | 1257 MHz |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 14 nm | 14 nm |
Leitungssysteme | 24 | 2304 |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 15 Watt | 185 Watt |
Anzahl der Transistoren | 189 million | 5,700 million |
Berechnungseinheiten | 36 | |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 6.2 TFLOPs | |
Pixel fill rate | 42.88 GP/s | |
Render output units | 32 | |
Stream Processors | 2304 | |
Texturfüllrate | 192.96 GTexel/s | |
Texture Units | 144 | |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
Display-Anschlüsse | No outputs | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort |
DisplayPort-Unterstützung | ||
Dual-Link-DVI-Unterstützung | ||
HDMI | ||
VGA | ||
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
Schnittstelle | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Überbrückungsfreies CrossFire | ||
Länge | 241 mm | |
Empfohlene Systemleistung (PSU) | 500 Watt | |
Zusätzliche Leistungssteckverbinder | 1x 8-pin | |
API-Unterstützung |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
OpenCL | 2.0 | |
Vulkan | ||
Speicher |
||
Maximale RAM-Belastung | 32 GB | 8 GB |
Breite des Speicherbusses | 64 / 128 Bit | 256 bit |
Speichertyp | LPDDR3 / DDR4 | GDDR5 |
Gemeinsamer Speicher | 1 | |
Speicherbandbreite | 256 GB/s | |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 8000 MHz | |
Technologien |
||
Quick Sync | ||
4K H264 Decode | ||
4K H264 Encode | ||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
AMD Radeon™ Chill | ||
AMD Radeon™ ReLive | ||
AppAcceleration | ||
CrossFire | ||
FreeSync | ||
H265/HEVC Decode | ||
H265/HEVC Encode | ||
HDMI 4K Support | ||
LiquidVR | ||
PowerTune | ||
TrueAudio | ||
Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
Virtual Super Resolution (VSR) | ||
VR Ready |