NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 710
Vergleichende Analyse von NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M und NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 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 950M
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 11 Monat(e) später
- 2.9x mehr Texturfüllrate: 44.96 GTexel / s vs 15.26 GTexel / s
- 3.3x mehr Leitungssysteme: 640 vs 192
- 3.9x bessere Gleitkomma-Leistung: 1,439 gflops vs 366.3 gflops
- 2x mehr maximale Speichergröße: 4 GB vs 2 GB
- 2500x mehr Speichertaktfrequenz: 1000 or 2500 MHz vs 1.8 GB/s
- 4.1x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2577 vs 623
- Etwa 2% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 217 vs 212
- 5x bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 9744 vs 1946
- 6.3x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 42.396 vs 6.705
- 3.7x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 373.644 vs 100.391
- 5.8x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.54 vs 0.441
- 4.8x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 39.412 vs 8.146
- 6.7x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 139.158 vs 20.64
- 4.2x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4148 vs 977
- 2.5x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3715 vs 1494
- Etwa 83% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 1833
- 4.2x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4148 vs 977
- 2.5x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3715 vs 1494
- Etwa 83% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 1833
- 17.4x bessere Leistung in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3350 vs 192
Spezifikationen | |
Startdatum | 13 March 2015 vs 27 March 2014 |
Texturfüllrate | 44.96 GTexel / s vs 15.26 GTexel / s |
Leitungssysteme | 640 vs 192 |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 1,439 gflops vs 366.3 gflops |
Maximale Speichergröße | 4 GB vs 2 GB |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 1000 or 2500 MHz vs 1.8 GB/s |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2577 vs 623 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 217 vs 212 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 9744 vs 1946 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 42.396 vs 6.705 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 373.644 vs 100.391 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.54 vs 0.441 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 39.412 vs 8.146 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 139.158 vs 20.64 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4148 vs 977 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 vs 1494 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 1833 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4148 vs 977 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 vs 1494 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 1833 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3350 vs 192 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der NVIDIA GeForce GT 710
- Etwa 4% höhere Kerntaktfrequenz:954 MHz vs 914 MHz
- 3.9x geringere typische Leistungsaufnahme: 19 Watt vs 75 Watt
Kerntaktfrequenz | 954 MHz vs 914 MHz |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 19 Watt vs 75 Watt |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 710
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 950M | NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2577 | 623 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 217 | 212 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 9744 | 1946 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 42.396 | 6.705 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 373.644 | 100.391 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.54 | 0.441 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 39.412 | 8.146 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 139.158 | 20.64 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4148 | 977 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 | 1494 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 1833 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4148 | 977 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 | 1494 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 1833 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3350 | 192 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M | NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 | |
---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
Architektur | Maxwell | Kepler 2.0 |
Codename | GM107 | GK208B |
Startdatum | 13 March 2015 | 27 March 2014 |
Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 797 | 1488 |
Typ | Laptop | Desktop |
Einführungspreis (MSRP) | $34.99 | |
Jetzt kaufen | $34.99 | |
Preis-Leistungs-Verhältnis (0-100) | 23.15 | |
Technische Info |
||
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1124 MHz | |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 914 MHz | 954 MHz |
CUDA-Kerne | 640 | 192 |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 1,439 gflops | 366.3 gflops |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Leitungssysteme | 640 | 192 |
Texturfüllrate | 44.96 GTexel / s | 15.26 GTexel / s |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 75 Watt | 19 Watt |
Anzahl der Transistoren | 1,870 million | 292 million |
Maximale GPU-Temperatur | 95 °C | |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
Display-Anschlüsse | No outputs | Dual Link DVI-DHDMIVGA, 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) Unterstützung | 1 | |
HDMI | ||
VGA аnalog Display-Unterstützung | 1 | |
Audioeingang für HDMI | Internal | |
HDCP | ||
Maximale VGA-Auflösung | 2048x1536 | |
Multi-Monitor-Unterstützung | ||
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
Busunterstützung | PCI Express 3.0 | PCI Express 2.0 |
Schnittstelle | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x8 |
Laptop-Größe | medium sized | |
Höhe | 2.713" (6.9 cm) | |
Länge | 5.7" (14.5 cm) | |
Zusätzliche Leistungssteckverbinder | None | |
API-Unterstützung |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Speicher |
||
Maximale RAM-Belastung | 4 GB | 2 GB |
Speicherbandbreite | 32 or 80 GB / s | 14.4 GB / s |
Breite des Speicherbusses | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 1000 or 2500 MHz | 1.8 GB/s |
Speichertyp | DDR3 or GDDR5 | DDR3 |
Gemeinsamer Speicher | 0 | |
Technologien |
||
Adaptive VSync | ||
Ansel | ||
BatteryBoost | ||
CUDA | ||
DSR | ||
GameStream | ||
GameWorks | ||
GeForce Experience | ||
GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
GPU Boost | ||
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
Optimus | ||
SLI | ||
3D Vision | ||
FXAA | ||
PhysX | ||
PureVideo |