NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M
Vergleichende Analyse von NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M und NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M 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 1 Jahr(e) 11 Monat(e) später
- Etwa 67% höhere Leitungssysteme: 640 vs 384
- Etwa 77% bessere Gleitkomma-Leistung: 1,155 gflops vs 652.8 gflops
- 2x mehr maximale Speichergröße: 2 GB vs 1 GB
- 2.1x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2521 vs 1202
- 2.6x bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 9809 vs 3802
- 3.8x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 37.761 vs 9.947
- Etwa 14% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 388.248 vs 340.824
- 2.5x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.428 vs 0.982
- 2.1x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 38.889 vs 18.773
- 6.5x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 151.016 vs 23.111
- Etwa 67% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3817 vs 2283
- Etwa 12% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3685 vs 3299
- Etwa 75% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3353 vs 1913
- Etwa 67% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3817 vs 2283
- Etwa 12% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3685 vs 3299
- Etwa 75% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3353 vs 1913
- 2.4x bessere Leistung in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 979 vs 414
Spezifikationen | |
Startdatum | 12 March 2014 vs 22 March 2012 |
Leitungssysteme | 640 vs 384 |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 1,155 gflops vs 652.8 gflops |
Maximale Speichergröße | 2 GB vs 1 GB |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2521 vs 1202 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 9809 vs 3802 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 37.761 vs 9.947 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 388.248 vs 340.824 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.428 vs 0.982 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 38.889 vs 18.773 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 151.016 vs 23.111 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3817 vs 2283 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3685 vs 3299 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 vs 1913 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3817 vs 2283 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3685 vs 3299 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 vs 1913 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 979 vs 414 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M
- Etwa 6% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 239 vs 225
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 239 vs 225 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M
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 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2521 | 1202 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 225 | 239 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 9809 | 3802 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 37.761 | 9.947 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 388.248 | 340.824 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.428 | 0.982 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 38.889 | 18.773 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 151.016 | 23.111 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3817 | 2283 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3685 | 3299 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 | 1913 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3817 | 2283 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3685 | 3299 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 | 1913 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 979 | 414 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M | NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M | |
---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
Architektur | Maxwell | Kepler |
Codename | GM107 | GK107 |
Startdatum | 12 March 2014 | 22 March 2012 |
Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 896 | 1188 |
Typ | Laptop | Laptop |
Technische Info |
||
CUDA-Kerne | 640 | 384 |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 1,155 gflops | 652.8 gflops |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Leitungssysteme | 640 | 384 |
Texturfüllrate | 36.08 GTexel / s | |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 45 Watt | 45 Watt |
Anzahl der Transistoren | 1,870 million | 1,270 million |
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 950 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 | |
HDCP | ||
Maximale VGA-Auflösung | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
Busunterstützung | PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0 | PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0 |
Schnittstelle | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Laptop-Größe | medium sized | medium sized |
API-Unterstützung |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12 API |
OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.1 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Speicher |
||
Maximale RAM-Belastung | 2 GB | 1 GB |
Speicherbandbreite | 80.0 GB / s | |
Breite des Speicherbusses | 128 Bit | 128bit |
Speichertyp | DDR3, GDDR5 | DDR3\GDDR5 |
Gemeinsamer Speicher | 0 | 0 |
Standard-Speicherkonfiguration | DDR3 or GDDR5 | |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 1800 MHz | |
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 | ||
3D Vision | ||
DirectCompute | ||
DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 |