NVIDIA GeForce 910M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660
Vergleichende Analyse von NVIDIA GeForce 910M und NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 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 NVIDIA GeForce 910M
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 2 Jahr(e) 11 Monat(e) später
- 4.2x geringere typische Leistungsaufnahme: 33 Watt vs 140 Watt
- 300x mehr Speichertaktfrequenz: 1800 MHz vs 6.0 GB/s
Startdatum | 18 August 2015 vs 6 September 2012 |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 33 Watt vs 140 Watt |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 1800 MHz vs 6.0 GB/s |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660
- Etwa 26% höhere Kerntaktfrequenz:980 MHz vs 775 MHz
- 6.3x mehr Texturfüllrate: 78.4 billion / sec vs 12.4 GTexel / s
- 2.5x mehr Leitungssysteme: 960 vs 384
- 6.7x bessere Gleitkomma-Leistung: 1,981 gflops vs 297.6 gflops
- 6.8x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 4017 vs 588
- 4.3x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 487 vs 113
- 4.3x bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 11364 vs 2629
- 4.7x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 30.505 vs 6.448
- 4.5x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 705.293 vs 155.993
- 5.4x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.085 vs 0.574
- 2.9x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 35.416 vs 12.2
- 2.3x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 62.69 vs 27.733
- 2.7x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3581 vs 1344
- Etwa 42% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3690 vs 2590
- Etwa 11% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3365 vs 3020
- 2.7x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3581 vs 1344
- Etwa 42% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3690 vs 2590
- Etwa 11% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3365 vs 3020
Spezifikationen | |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 980 MHz vs 775 MHz |
Texturfüllrate | 78.4 billion / sec vs 12.4 GTexel / s |
Leitungssysteme | 960 vs 384 |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 1,981 gflops vs 297.6 gflops |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 4017 vs 588 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 487 vs 113 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 11364 vs 2629 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 30.505 vs 6.448 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 705.293 vs 155.993 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.085 vs 0.574 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 35.416 vs 12.2 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 62.69 vs 27.733 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3581 vs 1344 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3690 vs 2590 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3365 vs 3020 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3581 vs 1344 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3690 vs 2590 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3365 vs 3020 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 910M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660
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 | NVIDIA GeForce 910M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 588 | 4017 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 113 | 487 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 2629 | 11364 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 6.448 | 30.505 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 155.993 | 705.293 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.574 | 3.085 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 12.2 | 35.416 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 27.733 | 62.69 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1344 | 3581 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2590 | 3690 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3020 | 3365 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1344 | 3581 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2590 | 3690 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3020 | 3365 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1307 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
NVIDIA GeForce 910M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 | |
---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
Architektur | Fermi 2.0 | Kepler |
Codename | GF117 | GK106 |
Startdatum | 18 August 2015 | 6 September 2012 |
Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 1382 | 740 |
Typ | Laptop | Desktop |
Einführungspreis (MSRP) | $229 | |
Jetzt kaufen | $349.99 | |
Preis-Leistungs-Verhältnis (0-100) | 14.35 | |
Technische Info |
||
Kerntaktfrequenz | 775 MHz | 980 MHz |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 297.6 gflops | 1,981 gflops |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Leitungssysteme | 384 | 960 |
Texturfüllrate | 12.4 GTexel / s | 78.4 billion / sec |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 33 Watt | 140 Watt |
Anzahl der Transistoren | 585 million | 2,540 million |
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1033 MHz | |
CUDA-Kerne | 960 | |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
Display-Anschlüsse | No outputs | One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI..., 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
Audioeingang für HDMI | Internal | |
G-SYNC-Unterstützung | ||
HDCP | ||
HDMI | ||
Maximale VGA-Auflösung | 2048x1536 | |
Multi-Monitor-Unterstützung | ||
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
Busunterstützung | PCI Express 3.0 | PCI Express 3.0 |
Schnittstelle | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Zusätzliche Leistungssteckverbinder | None | One 6-pin |
Höhe | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
Länge | 9.5" (24.1 cm) | |
API-Unterstützung |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.3 |
Speicher |
||
Speicherbandbreite | 14.4 GB / s | 144.2 GB / s |
Breite des Speicherbusses | 64 Bit | 192-bit GDDR5 |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 1800 MHz | 6.0 GB/s |
Speichertyp | DDR3 | GDDR5 |
Gemeinsamer Speicher | 0 | |
Maximale RAM-Belastung | 2 GB | |
Technologien |
||
CUDA | ||
GameWorks | ||
GPU Boost | ||
Optimus | ||
3D Blu-Ray | ||
3D Gaming | ||
3D Vision | ||
Adaptive VSync | ||
FXAA | ||
SLI | ||
TXAA |