NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 vs NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000
Vergleichende Analyse von NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 und NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 Videokarten für alle bekannten Merkmale in den folgenden Kategorien: Essenzielles, Technische Info, Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse, Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen, API-Unterstützung, Speicher. 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 RTX 6000
- Etwa 43% höhere Kerntaktfrequenz:1440 MHz vs 1005 MHz
- Etwa 48% höhere Boost-Taktfrequenz: 1770 MHz vs 1200 MHz
- Etwa 22% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 488.989 vs 401.574
- Etwa 2% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3717 vs 3652
- Etwa 2% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3357 vs 3290
- Etwa 2% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3717 vs 3652
- Etwa 2% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3357 vs 3290
Spezifikationen | |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 1440 MHz vs 1005 MHz |
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1770 MHz vs 1200 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 488.989 vs 401.574 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3717 vs 3652 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 vs 3290 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3717 vs 3652 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 vs 3290 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000
- Etwa 3% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 19370 vs 18872
- Etwa 10% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 869 vs 791
- Etwa 86% bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 137748 vs 74179
- Etwa 18% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 6432.348 vs 5451.006
- Etwa 6% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 43.914 vs 41.461
- Etwa 40% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 215.219 vs 153.677
- Etwa 37% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 2101.927 vs 1534.582
- Etwa 10% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 21578 vs 19571
- Etwa 10% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 21578 vs 19571
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 19370 vs 18872 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 869 vs 791 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 137748 vs 74179 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 6432.348 vs 5451.006 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 43.914 vs 41.461 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 215.219 vs 153.677 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 2101.927 vs 1534.582 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 21578 vs 19571 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 21578 vs 19571 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000
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 RTX 6000 | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 18872 | 19370 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 791 | 869 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 74179 | 137748 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 488.989 | 401.574 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 5451.006 | 6432.348 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 41.461 | 43.914 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 153.677 | 215.219 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1534.582 | 2101.927 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 19571 | 21578 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3717 | 3652 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 | 3290 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 19571 | 21578 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3717 | 3652 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 | 3290 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 13943 | 0 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000 | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 | |
---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
Architektur | Turing | Turing |
Codename | TU102 | TU102 |
Startdatum | 13 August 2018 | 13 August 2018 |
Einführungspreis (MSRP) | $6,299 | $9,999 |
Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 111 | 103 |
Typ | Workstation | Workstation |
Technische Info |
||
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1770 MHz | 1200 MHz |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 1440 MHz | 1005 MHz |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 12 nm | 12 nm |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 250 Watt | 250 Watt |
Anzahl der Transistoren | 18,600 million | 18,600 million |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
Display-Anschlüsse | 3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C | 3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C |
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
Schnittstelle | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Länge | 267 mm | 267 mm |
Zusätzliche Leistungssteckverbinder | 2x 8-pin | 2x 8-pin |
API-Unterstützung |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (12_1) |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Speicher |
||
Speichertaktfrequenz | 14000 MHz | 14000 MHz |