NVIDIA Quadro M4000M vs AMD Radeon HD 8970M
Vergleichende Analyse von NVIDIA Quadro M4000M und AMD Radeon HD 8970M 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 M4000M
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 2 Jahr(e) 3 Monat(e) später
- Etwa 15% höhere Kerntaktfrequenz:975 MHz vs 850 MHz
- Etwa 19% höhere Boost-Taktfrequenz: 1013 MHz vs 850 MHz
- Etwa 8% höhere Texturfüllrate: 78 GTexel / s vs 72 GTexel / s
- Etwa 8% bessere Gleitkomma-Leistung: 2,496 gflops vs 2,304 gflops
- Etwa 4% höhere Speichertaktfrequenz: 5012 MHz vs 4800 MHz
- Etwa 59% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6146 vs 3876
- Etwa 42% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 81.104 vs 57.241
- Etwa 1% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1235.338 vs 1223.742
- Etwa 7% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 6.157 vs 5.78
- 3x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 7602 vs 2521
- Etwa 19% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3093 vs 2595
- 3x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 7602 vs 2521
- Etwa 19% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3093 vs 2595
| Spezifikationen | |
| Startdatum | 18 August 2015 vs 14 May 2013 |
| Kerntaktfrequenz | 975 MHz vs 850 MHz |
| Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1013 MHz vs 850 MHz |
| Texturfüllrate | 78 GTexel / s vs 72 GTexel / s |
| Gleitkomma-Leistung | 2,496 gflops vs 2,304 gflops |
| Speichertaktfrequenz | 5012 MHz vs 4800 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6146 vs 3876 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 81.104 vs 57.241 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1235.338 vs 1223.742 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.157 vs 5.78 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7602 vs 2521 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3093 vs 2595 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7602 vs 2521 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3093 vs 2595 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der AMD Radeon HD 8970M
- Etwa 95% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 807 vs 413
- Etwa 5% bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 20899 vs 19918
- Etwa 30% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 89.306 vs 68.443
- Etwa 7% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 268.643 vs 251.464
- Etwa 34% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3688 vs 2749
- Etwa 34% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3688 vs 2749
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 807 vs 413 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 20899 vs 19918 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 89.306 vs 68.443 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 268.643 vs 251.464 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3688 vs 2749 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3688 vs 2749 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M4000M
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 8970M
| 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 M4000M | AMD Radeon HD 8970M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6146 | 3876 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 413 | 807 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 19918 | 20899 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 81.104 | 57.241 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1235.338 | 1223.742 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.157 | 5.78 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 68.443 | 89.306 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 251.464 | 268.643 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7602 | 2521 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2749 | 3688 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3093 | 2595 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7602 | 2521 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2749 | 3688 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3093 | 2595 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 | 0 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
| NVIDIA Quadro M4000M | AMD Radeon HD 8970M | |
|---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
| Architektur | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Codename | GM204 | Neptune |
| Startdatum | 18 August 2015 | 14 May 2013 |
| Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 551 | 553 |
| Typ | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
| Design | AMD Radeon HD 8000M Series | |
Technische Info |
||
| Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1013 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Kerntaktfrequenz | 975 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Gleitkomma-Leistung | 2,496 gflops | 2,304 gflops |
| Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Leitungssysteme | 1,280 | 1280 |
| Texturfüllrate | 78 GTexel / s | 72 GTexel / s |
| Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 100 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Anzahl der Transistoren | 5,200 million | 2,800 million |
| Berechnungseinheiten | 20 | |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
| Display-Anschlüsse | No outputs | No outputs |
| Display Port | 1.2 | |
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
| Schnittstelle | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Laptop-Größe | large | large |
| Zusätzliche Leistungssteckverbinder | None | |
API-Unterstützung |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 11 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Speicher |
||
| Maximale RAM-Belastung | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Speicherbandbreite | 160 GB / s | 153.6 GB/s |
| Breite des Speicherbusses | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Speichertaktfrequenz | 5012 MHz | 4800 MHz |
| Speichertyp | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Gemeinsamer Speicher | 0 | 0 |
Technologien |
||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView Display Management | ||
| Optimus | ||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| ZeroCore | ||
