NVIDIA Quadro M1000M vs AMD Radeon R7 M360
Vergleichende Analyse von NVIDIA Quadro M1000M und AMD Radeon R7 M360 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 M1000M
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 3 Monat(e) später
- Etwa 18% höhere Texturfüllrate: 31.78 GTexel / s vs 27 GTexel / s
- Etwa 33% höhere Leitungssysteme: 512 vs 384
- Etwa 18% bessere Gleitkomma-Leistung: 1,017 gflops vs 864.0 gflops
- 5x mehr Speichertaktfrequenz: 5012 MHz vs 1000 MHz
- 4.9x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2835 vs 581
- 2.1x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 307 vs 148
- Etwa 86% bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 8849 vs 4769
- 2.6x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 38.33 vs 14.911
- 5.1x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 721.18 vs 141.079
- 3.3x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.056 vs 0.927
- 2.9x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 42.938 vs 14.763
- 2.8x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 137.786 vs 49.774
- 3x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4196 vs 1384
- 2.9x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3716 vs 1280
- Etwa 37% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 2460
- 3x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4196 vs 1384
- 2.9x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3716 vs 1280
- Etwa 37% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 2460
Spezifikationen | |
Startdatum | 18 August 2015 vs 5 May 2015 |
Texturfüllrate | 31.78 GTexel / s vs 27 GTexel / s |
Leitungssysteme | 512 vs 384 |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 1,017 gflops vs 864.0 gflops |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 5012 MHz vs 1000 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2835 vs 581 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 307 vs 148 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 8849 vs 4769 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 38.33 vs 14.911 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 721.18 vs 141.079 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.056 vs 0.927 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 42.938 vs 14.763 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 137.786 vs 49.774 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4196 vs 1384 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3716 vs 1280 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 2460 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4196 vs 1384 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3716 vs 1280 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 2460 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der AMD Radeon R7 M360
- Etwa 11% höhere Kerntaktfrequenz:1100 MHz vs 993 MHz
- Etwa 5% höhere Boost-Taktfrequenz: 1125 MHz vs 1072 MHz
- 2048x mehr maximale Speichergröße: 4 GB vs 2 GB / 4 GB
Kerntaktfrequenz | 1100 MHz vs 993 MHz |
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1125 MHz vs 1072 MHz |
Maximale Speichergröße | 4 GB vs 2 GB / 4 GB |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M1000M
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 M360
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 M1000M | AMD Radeon R7 M360 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2835 | 581 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 307 | 148 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 8849 | 4769 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 38.33 | 14.911 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 721.18 | 141.079 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.056 | 0.927 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 42.938 | 14.763 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 137.786 | 49.774 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4196 | 1384 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3716 | 1280 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 2460 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4196 | 1384 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3716 | 1280 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 2460 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1002 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
NVIDIA Quadro M1000M | AMD Radeon R7 M360 | |
---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
Architektur | Maxwell | GCN 3.0 |
Codename | GM107 | Meso |
Startdatum | 18 August 2015 | 5 May 2015 |
Einführungspreis (MSRP) | $200.89 | |
Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 806 | 1436 |
Jetzt kaufen | $203.37 | |
Typ | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
Preis-Leistungs-Verhältnis (0-100) | 16.10 | |
Design | AMD Radeon R7 300 Series | |
Technische Info |
||
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1072 MHz | 1125 MHz |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 993 MHz | 1100 MHz |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 1,017 gflops | 864.0 gflops |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Leitungssysteme | 512 | 384 |
Texturfüllrate | 31.78 GTexel / s | 27 GTexel / s |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 40 Watt | |
Anzahl der Transistoren | 1,870 million | 3,100 million |
Berechnungseinheiten | 6 | |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
Display-Anschlüsse | No outputs | No outputs |
Display Port | 1.2 | |
Eyefinity | ||
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
Schnittstelle | MXM-A (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
Laptop-Größe | large | |
Zusätzliche Leistungssteckverbinder | None | |
Busunterstützung | PCIe 3.0 | |
API-Unterstützung |
||
DirectX | 12 | 12 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
Shader Model | 5.0 | |
Vulkan | ||
Mantle | ||
OpenCL | Not Listed | |
Speicher |
||
Maximale RAM-Belastung | 2 GB / 4 GB | 4 GB |
Speicherbandbreite | 80 GB / s | 14.4 GB / s |
Breite des Speicherbusses | 128 Bit | 64 bit |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 5012 MHz | 1000 MHz |
Speichertyp | GDDR5 | DDR3 |
Gemeinsamer Speicher | 0 | 0 |
Technologien |
||
3D Vision Pro | ||
Mosaic | ||
nView Display Management | ||
Optimus | ||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
DualGraphics | ||
FreeSync | ||
HD3D | ||
PowerTune | ||
Umschaltbare Grafiken | ||
ZeroCore |