NVIDIA GeForce 940MX vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660M
Vergleichende Analyse von NVIDIA GeForce 940MX und NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660M 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 940MX
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 4 Jahr(e) 3 Monat(e) später
- Etwa 14% höhere Kerntaktfrequenz:954 MHz vs 835 MHz
- Etwa 5% höhere Boost-Taktfrequenz: 993 MHz vs 950 MHz
- Etwa 5% bessere Gleitkomma-Leistung: 762.6 gflops vs 729.6 gflops
- 2.2x geringere typische Leistungsaufnahme: 23 Watt vs 50 Watt
- 4x mehr maximale Speichergröße: 4 GB vs 1 GB
- 2.5x mehr Speichertaktfrequenz: 5012 MHz vs 2000 MHz
- Etwa 5% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1516 vs 1445
- Etwa 56% bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 6325 vs 4062
- 2.7x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 28.91 vs 10.837
- Etwa 67% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.83 vs 1.098
- Etwa 28% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 27.833 vs 21.798
- 3.1x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 103.937 vs 33.754
- 2.3x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2486 vs 1094
- Etwa 59% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3587 vs 2253
- Etwa 6% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3357 vs 3176
- 2.3x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2486 vs 1094
- Etwa 59% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3587 vs 2253
- Etwa 6% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3357 vs 3176
- Etwa 23% bessere Leistung in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 585 vs 475
Spezifikationen | |
Startdatum | 28 June 2016 vs 22 March 2012 |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 954 MHz vs 835 MHz |
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 993 MHz vs 950 MHz |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 762.6 gflops vs 729.6 gflops |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 23 Watt vs 50 Watt |
Maximale Speichergröße | 4 GB vs 1 GB |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 5012 MHz vs 2000 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1516 vs 1445 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 6325 vs 4062 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 28.91 vs 10.837 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.83 vs 1.098 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 27.833 vs 21.798 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 103.937 vs 33.754 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2486 vs 1094 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3587 vs 2253 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 vs 3176 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2486 vs 1094 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3587 vs 2253 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 vs 3176 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 585 vs 475 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660M
- Etwa 28% höhere Texturfüllrate: 30.4 billion / sec vs 23.83 GTexel / s
- Etwa 56% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 269 vs 172
- Etwa 29% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 405.086 vs 312.94
Spezifikationen | |
Texturfüllrate | 30.4 billion / sec vs 23.83 GTexel / s |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 269 vs 172 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 405.086 vs 312.94 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 940MX
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660M
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 | NVIDIA GeForce 940MX | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1516 | 1445 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 172 | 269 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 6325 | 4062 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 28.91 | 10.837 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 312.94 | 405.086 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.83 | 1.098 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 27.833 | 21.798 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 103.937 | 33.754 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2486 | 1094 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3587 | 2253 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 | 3176 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2486 | 1094 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3587 | 2253 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 | 3176 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 585 | 475 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
NVIDIA GeForce 940MX | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660M | |
---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
Architektur | Maxwell | Kepler |
Codename | GM108 | GK107 |
Startdatum | 28 June 2016 | 22 March 2012 |
Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 1071 | 1253 |
Typ | Laptop | Laptop |
Technische Info |
||
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 993 MHz | 950 MHz |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 954 MHz | 835 MHz |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 762.6 gflops | 729.6 gflops |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Leitungssysteme | 384 | 384 |
Texturfüllrate | 23.83 GTexel / s | 30.4 billion / sec |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 23 Watt | 50 Watt |
Anzahl der Transistoren | 1,870 million | 1,270 million |
CUDA-Kerne | 384 | |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
Display-Anschlüsse | No outputs | No outputs |
HDCP | ||
HDMI | ||
Maximale VGA-Auflösung | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
Busunterstützung | PCI Express 3.0 | PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0 |
Schnittstelle | PCIe 3.0 x8 | MXM-B (3.0) |
Laptop-Größe | medium sized | large |
Zusätzliche Leistungssteckverbinder | None | |
SLI-Optionen | 2-way | |
API-Unterstützung |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12 API |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Speicher |
||
Maximale RAM-Belastung | 4 GB | 1 GB |
Speicherbandbreite | 40.1 GB / s | 64.0 GB / s |
Breite des Speicherbusses | 64 Bit | 128bit |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 5012 MHz | 2000 MHz |
Speichertyp | DDR3, GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Gemeinsamer Speicher | 0 | 0 |
Technologien |
||
CUDA | ||
GameWorks | ||
GeForce Experience | ||
GPU Boost | ||
Optimus | ||
3D Vision | ||
3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
Adaptive VSync | ||
DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
FXAA | ||
SLI | ||
TXAA |