NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti vs NVIDIA GeForce 920M
Vergleichende Analyse von NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti und NVIDIA GeForce 920M 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 980 Ti
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 2 Monat(e) später
- Etwa 5% höhere Kerntaktfrequenz:1000 MHz vs 954 MHz
- 14.2x mehr Texturfüllrate: 176 billion / sec vs 12.4 GTexel / s
- 7.3x mehr Leitungssysteme: 2816 vs 384
- 20.4x bessere Gleitkomma-Leistung: 6,060 gflops vs 297.6 gflops
- Um etwa 50% höhere maximale Speichergröße: 6 GB vs 4 GB
- 19.2x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 13758 vs 716
- 7.2x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 852 vs 119
- 11.5x bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 42988 vs 3722
- 17.4x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 145.843 vs 8.358
- 10.9x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1722.98 vs 157.606
- 13.8x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 11.661 vs 0.843
- 2.4x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 37.16 vs 15.374
- 19.5x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 788.464 vs 40.443
- 6.6x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 10471 vs 1598
- Etwa 2% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3695 vs 3636
- 6.6x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 10471 vs 1598
- Etwa 2% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3695 vs 3636
- 4.1x bessere Leistung in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1321 vs 326
Spezifikationen | |
Startdatum | 2 June 2015 vs 13 March 2015 |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 1000 MHz vs 954 MHz |
Texturfüllrate | 176 billion / sec vs 12.4 GTexel / s |
Leitungssysteme | 2816 vs 384 |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 6,060 gflops vs 297.6 gflops |
Maximale Speichergröße | 6 GB vs 4 GB |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 13758 vs 716 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 852 vs 119 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 42988 vs 3722 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 145.843 vs 8.358 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1722.98 vs 157.606 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 11.661 vs 0.843 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 37.16 vs 15.374 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 788.464 vs 40.443 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10471 vs 1598 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3695 vs 3636 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10471 vs 1598 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3695 vs 3636 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1321 vs 326 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der NVIDIA GeForce 920M
- 7.6x geringere typische Leistungsaufnahme: 33 Watt vs 250 Watt
- 257.1x mehr Speichertaktfrequenz: 1800 MHz vs 7.0 GB/s
- Etwa 1% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 3338
- Etwa 1% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 3338
Spezifikationen | |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 33 Watt vs 250 Watt |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 1800 MHz vs 7.0 GB/s |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 3338 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 3338 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 920M
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 980 Ti | NVIDIA GeForce 920M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 13758 | 716 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 852 | 119 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 42988 | 3722 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 145.843 | 8.358 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1722.98 | 157.606 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 11.661 | 0.843 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 37.16 | 15.374 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 788.464 | 40.443 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10471 | 1598 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3695 | 3636 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3338 | 3358 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10471 | 1598 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3695 | 3636 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3338 | 3358 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1321 | 326 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti | NVIDIA GeForce 920M | |
---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
Architektur | Maxwell 2.0 | Kepler 2.0 |
Codename | GM200 | GK208B |
Startdatum | 2 June 2015 | 13 March 2015 |
Einführungspreis (MSRP) | $649 | |
Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 310 | 1297 |
Jetzt kaufen | $679.99 | |
Typ | Desktop | Laptop |
Preis-Leistungs-Verhältnis (0-100) | 23.43 | |
Technische Info |
||
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1075 MHz | |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 1000 MHz | 954 MHz |
CUDA-Kerne | 2816 | |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 6,060 gflops | 297.6 gflops |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Leitungssysteme | 2816 | 384 |
Texturfüllrate | 176 billion / sec | 12.4 GTexel / s |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 250 Watt | 33 Watt |
Anzahl der Transistoren | 8,000 million | 585 million |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
Audioeingang für HDMI | Internal | |
Display-Anschlüsse | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort, Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 | No outputs |
G-SYNC-Unterstützung | ||
HDCP | ||
Maximale VGA-Auflösung | 2048x1536 | |
Multi-Monitor-Unterstützung | ||
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
Busunterstützung | PCI Express 3.0 | PCI Express 3.0 |
Höhe | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
Schnittstelle | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
Länge | 10.5" (26.7 cm) | |
Empfohlene Systemleistung (PSU) | 600 Watt | |
SLI-Optionen | 4x | |
Zusätzliche Leistungssteckverbinder | 6-pin + 8-pin | |
API-Unterstützung |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Speicher |
||
Maximale RAM-Belastung | 6 GB | 4 GB |
Speicherbandbreite | 336.5 GB / s | 14.4 GB / s |
Breite des Speicherbusses | 384 Bit | 64 Bit |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 7.0 GB/s | 1800 MHz |
Speichertyp | GDDR5 | DDR3 |
Gemeinsamer Speicher | 0 | 0 |
Technologien |
||
3D Vision | ||
Adaptive Vertical Sync | ||
CUDA | ||
GameStream | ||
GameWorks | ||
GeForce Experience | ||
GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
GPU Boost | ||
SLI | ||
Surround | ||
3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
Optimus | ||
Verde Drivers |