NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M vs Intel HD Graphics 4600
Vergleichende Analyse von NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M und Intel HD Graphics 4600 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 GTX 850M
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 9 Monat(e) später
- 7.2x mehr Texturfüllrate: 36.08 GTexel / s vs 5 GTexel / s
- 32x mehr Leitungssysteme: 640 vs 20
- 23.1x bessere Gleitkomma-Leistung: 1,155 gflops vs 50 gflops
- 4x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2521 vs 630
- 3.1x bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 9809 vs 3210
- 4.3x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 37.761 vs 8.844
- 2.3x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 388.248 vs 171.17
- 2.2x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.428 vs 1.115
- 3.7x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 38.889 vs 10.385
- 12.2x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 151.016 vs 12.361
- 3.9x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3817 vs 988
- 2.2x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3685 vs 1702
- Etwa 19% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3353 vs 2808
- 3.9x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3817 vs 988
- 2.2x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3685 vs 1702
- Etwa 19% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3353 vs 2808
- 5x bessere Leistung in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 979 vs 194
Spezifikationen | |
Startdatum | 12 March 2014 vs 3 June 2013 |
Texturfüllrate | 36.08 GTexel / s vs 5 GTexel / s |
Leitungssysteme | 640 vs 20 |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 1,155 gflops vs 50 gflops |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2521 vs 630 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 9809 vs 3210 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 37.761 vs 8.844 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 388.248 vs 171.17 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.428 vs 1.115 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 38.889 vs 10.385 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 151.016 vs 12.361 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3817 vs 988 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3685 vs 1702 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 vs 2808 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3817 vs 988 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3685 vs 1702 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 vs 2808 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 979 vs 194 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der Intel HD Graphics 4600
- Ein neuerer Herstellungsprozess ermöglicht eine leistungsfähigere, aber dennoch kühlere Grafikkarte: 22 nm vs 28 nm
- Etwa 40% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 314 vs 225
Spezifikationen | |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 22 nm vs 28 nm |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 314 vs 225 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M
GPU 2: Intel HD Graphics 4600
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 GTX 850M | Intel HD Graphics 4600 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2521 | 630 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 225 | 314 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 9809 | 3210 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 37.761 | 8.844 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 388.248 | 171.17 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.428 | 1.115 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 38.889 | 10.385 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 151.016 | 12.361 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3817 | 988 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3685 | 1702 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 | 2808 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3817 | 988 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3685 | 1702 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 | 2808 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 979 | 194 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M | Intel HD Graphics 4600 | |
---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
Architektur | Maxwell | Generation 7.5 |
Codename | GM107 | Haswell GT2 |
Startdatum | 12 March 2014 | 3 June 2013 |
Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 896 | 1359 |
Typ | Laptop | Laptop |
Technische Info |
||
CUDA-Kerne | 640 | |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 1,155 gflops | 50 gflops |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 28 nm | 22 nm |
Leitungssysteme | 640 | 20 |
Texturfüllrate | 36.08 GTexel / s | 5 GTexel / s |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 45 Watt | 45 Watt |
Anzahl der Transistoren | 1,870 million | 392 million |
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1250 MHz | |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 400 MHz | |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
7.1-Kanal HD-Audio auf HDMI | ||
Display-Anschlüsse | No outputs | No outputs |
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 |
||
Busunterstützung | PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0 | |
Schnittstelle | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
Laptop-Größe | medium sized | |
API-Unterstützung |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_1) |
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.3 |
Speicher |
||
Maximale RAM-Belastung | 2 GB | |
Speicherbandbreite | 80.0 GB / s | |
Breite des Speicherbusses | 128 Bit | 64 / 128 Bit |
Speichertyp | DDR3, GDDR5 | |
Gemeinsamer Speicher | 0 | 1 |
Standard-Speicherkonfiguration | DDR3 or GDDR5 | |
Technologien |
||
3D Blu-Ray | ||
Adaptive VSync | ||
Ansel | ||
BatteryBoost | ||
CUDA | ||
Direct Compute | ||
FXAA | ||
GeForce Experience | ||
GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
GPU Boost | ||
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
Optimus | ||
SLI | ||
TXAA | ||
Quick Sync |