NVIDIA Quadro K2000 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M
Vergleichende Analyse von NVIDIA Quadro K2000 und NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M 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 Quadro K2000
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 4 Monat(e) später
- Etwa 34% höhere Texturfüllrate: 30.53 GTexel / s vs 22.7 billion / sec
- Etwa 35% bessere Gleitkomma-Leistung: 732.7 gflops vs 544.5 gflops
- 2.2x mehr Speichertaktfrequenz: 4000 MHz vs 1800 MHz
- Etwa 69% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1580 vs 935
- 2.4x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 384 vs 160
- Etwa 52% bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 4071 vs 2673
- Etwa 69% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 14.332 vs 8.493
- Etwa 27% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.093 vs 0.863
- 2x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 38.219 vs 19.116
- Etwa 28% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2446 vs 1913
- Etwa 28% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2446 vs 1913
Spezifikationen | |
Startdatum | 1 March 2013 vs 1 October 2012 |
Texturfüllrate | 30.53 GTexel / s vs 22.7 billion / sec |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 732.7 gflops vs 544.5 gflops |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 4000 MHz vs 1800 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1580 vs 935 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 384 vs 160 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 4071 vs 2673 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 14.332 vs 8.493 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.093 vs 0.863 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 38.219 vs 19.116 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2446 vs 1913 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2446 vs 1913 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M
- Etwa 59% geringere typische Leistungsaufnahme: 32 Watt vs 51 Watt
- Etwa 8% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 285.42 vs 265.424
- Etwa 15% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 17.242 vs 15.009
- 2.3x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3670 vs 1631
- Etwa 69% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3341 vs 1974
- 2.3x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3670 vs 1631
- Etwa 69% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3341 vs 1974
Spezifikationen | |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 32 Watt vs 51 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 285.42 vs 265.424 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 17.242 vs 15.009 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3670 vs 1631 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3341 vs 1974 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3670 vs 1631 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3341 vs 1974 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K2000
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M
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) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA Quadro K2000 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1580 | 935 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 384 | 160 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 4071 | 2673 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 14.332 | 8.493 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 265.424 | 285.42 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.093 | 0.863 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 15.009 | 17.242 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 38.219 | 19.116 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2446 | 1913 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1631 | 3670 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1974 | 3341 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2446 | 1913 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1631 | 3670 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1974 | 3341 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
NVIDIA Quadro K2000 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M | |
---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
Architektur | Kepler | Kepler |
Codename | GK107 | GK107 |
Startdatum | 1 March 2013 | 1 October 2012 |
Einführungspreis (MSRP) | $599 | |
Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 1212 | 1214 |
Jetzt kaufen | $164.99 | |
Typ | Workstation | Laptop |
Preis-Leistungs-Verhältnis (0-100) | 11.74 | |
Technische Info |
||
Kerntaktfrequenz | 954 MHz | |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 732.7 gflops | 544.5 gflops |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Leitungssysteme | 384 | 384 |
Texturfüllrate | 30.53 GTexel / s | 22.7 billion / sec |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 51 Watt | 32 Watt |
Anzahl der Transistoren | 1,270 million | 1,270 million |
CUDA-Kerne | 384 | |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
Display-Anschlüsse | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort | No outputs |
HDCP | ||
HDMI | ||
Maximale VGA-Auflösung | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
Schnittstelle | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Länge | 202 mm | |
Zusätzliche Leistungssteckverbinder | None | |
Busunterstützung | PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0 | |
Laptop-Größe | medium sized | |
API-Unterstützung |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12 API |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Vulkan | ||
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Speicher |
||
Maximale RAM-Belastung | 2 GB | 2 GB |
Speicherbandbreite | 64 GB / s | |
Breite des Speicherbusses | 128 Bit | 128bit |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 4000 MHz | 1800 MHz |
Speichertyp | GDDR5 | DDR3\GDDR5 |
Gemeinsamer Speicher | 0 | |
Technologien |
||
3D Blu-Ray | ||
3D Vision | ||
CUDA | ||
DirectCompute | ||
DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
Optimus |