NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Super vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
Vergleichende Analyse von NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Super und NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q 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 RTX 2070 Super
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 5 Monat(e) später
- Etwa 81% höhere Kerntaktfrequenz:1605 MHz vs 885 MHz
- Etwa 49% höhere Boost-Taktfrequenz: 1770 MHz vs 1185 MHz
- Etwa 11% höhere Leitungssysteme: 2560 vs 2304
- Etwa 55% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 18254 vs 11744
- Etwa 83% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 886 vs 483
- Etwa 28% bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 99973 vs 78224
- Etwa 75% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 293.508 vs 168.08
- 2.1x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 4045.784 vs 1935.102
- Etwa 28% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 29.145 vs 22.794
- Etwa 42% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 158.103 vs 111.023
- Etwa 44% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 1438.826 vs 1001.496
- Etwa 46% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 25232 vs 17328
- Etwa 46% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 25232 vs 17328
Spezifikationen | |
Startdatum | 2 July 2019 vs 29 January 2019 |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 1605 MHz vs 885 MHz |
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1770 MHz vs 1185 MHz |
Leitungssysteme | 2560 vs 2304 |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 18254 vs 11744 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 886 vs 483 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 99973 vs 78224 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 293.508 vs 168.08 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 4045.784 vs 1935.102 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 29.145 vs 22.794 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 158.103 vs 111.023 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1438.826 vs 1001.496 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 25232 vs 17328 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 25232 vs 17328 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
- Etwa 87% geringere typische Leistungsaufnahme: 115 Watt vs 215 Watt
- 2.4x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 8912 vs 3718
- 2.4x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 8055 vs 3359
- 2.4x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 8912 vs 3718
- 2.4x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 8055 vs 3359
- 976.4x bessere Leistung in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 6835 vs 7
Spezifikationen | |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 115 Watt vs 215 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 8912 vs 3718 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 8055 vs 3359 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 8912 vs 3718 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 8055 vs 3359 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 6835 vs 7 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Super
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
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 RTX 2070 Super | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 18254 | 11744 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 886 | 483 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 99973 | 78224 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 293.508 | 168.08 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 4045.784 | 1935.102 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 29.145 | 22.794 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 158.103 | 111.023 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1438.826 | 1001.496 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 25232 | 17328 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3718 | 8912 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3359 | 8055 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 25232 | 17328 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3718 | 8912 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3359 | 8055 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 7 | 6835 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Super | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q | |
---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
Architektur | Turing | Turing |
Codename | TU104 | TU106 |
Startdatum | 2 July 2019 | 29 January 2019 |
Einführungspreis (MSRP) | $499 | |
Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 133 | 178 |
Typ | Desktop | Laptop |
Technische Info |
||
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1770 MHz | 1185 MHz |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 1605 MHz | 885 MHz |
CUDA-Kerne | 2560 | |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 12 nm | 12 nm |
Maximale GPU-Temperatur | 88 C | |
Leitungssysteme | 2560 | 2304 |
Render output units | 64 | |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 215 Watt | 115 Watt |
Anzahl der Transistoren | 13.6 B | 10,800 million |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
Display Port | 1.4 | |
DisplayPort-Unterstützung | ||
Dual-Link-DVI-Unterstützung | ||
G-SYNC-Unterstützung | ||
HDCP | ||
HDMI | ||
Multi-Monitor-Unterstützung | ||
Anzahl der gleichzeitigen Anzeigen | 4 | |
Display-Anschlüsse | No outputs | |
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
Höhe | 4.556” (115.7mm) | |
Länge | 10.5” (266.74mm) | |
Empfohlene Systemleistung (PSU) | 650 Watt | |
Zusätzliche Leistungssteckverbinder | 6 pin + 8 pin | None |
Breite | 2-Slot | |
Schnittstelle | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
API-Unterstützung |
||
DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Shader Model | 6.4 | |
Vulkan | ||
Speicher |
||
Maximale RAM-Belastung | 8 GB | |
Speicherbandbreite | 448 GB/s | |
Breite des Speicherbusses | 256 bit | 256 Bit |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 14000 MHz | 14000 MHz |
Speichertyp | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
Technologien |
||
Ansel | ||
HDMI 2.0b | ||
SLI | ||
VR Ready |