NVIDIA RTX A4000 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070
Vergleichende Analyse von NVIDIA RTX A4000 und NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 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 RTX A4000
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 7 Monat(e) später
- Etwa 4% höhere Leitungssysteme: 6144 vs 5888
- Etwa 57% geringere typische Leistungsaufnahme: 140 Watt vs 220 Watt
- 2x mehr maximale Speichergröße: 16 GB vs 8 GB
- Etwa 3% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 1026 vs 999
- Etwa 14% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 1895.111 vs 1664.554
Spezifikationen | |
Startdatum | 12 Apr 2021 vs 1 Sep 2020 |
Leitungssysteme | 6144 vs 5888 |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 140 Watt vs 220 Watt |
Maximale Speichergröße | 16 GB vs 8 GB |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 1026 vs 999 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1895.111 vs 1664.554 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070
- 2x mehr Kerntaktfrequenz: 1500 MHz vs 735 MHz
- Etwa 11% höhere Boost-Taktfrequenz: 1725 MHz vs 1560 MHz
- Etwa 6% höhere Texturfüllrate: 317.4 GTexel/s vs 299.5 GTexel/s
- Etwa 14% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 22253 vs 19545
- Etwa 1% bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 123479 vs 121768
- Etwa 8% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 453.922 vs 420.465
- Etwa 40% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 5803.174 vs 4156.52
- Etwa 26% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 40.757 vs 32.297
- Etwa 12% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 182.055 vs 162.131
- Etwa 44% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 31716 vs 22050
- 3.7x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 13566 vs 3715
- 9.5x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 31930 vs 3355
- Etwa 44% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 31716 vs 22050
- 3.7x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 13566 vs 3715
- 9.5x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 31930 vs 3355
- Etwa 21% bessere Leistung in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3163 vs 2604
Spezifikationen | |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 1500 MHz vs 735 MHz |
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1725 MHz vs 1560 MHz |
Texturfüllrate | 317.4 GTexel/s vs 299.5 GTexel/s |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 22253 vs 19545 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 123479 vs 121768 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 453.922 vs 420.465 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 5803.174 vs 4156.52 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 40.757 vs 32.297 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 182.055 vs 162.131 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 31716 vs 22050 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 13566 vs 3715 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 31930 vs 3355 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 31716 vs 22050 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 13566 vs 3715 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 31930 vs 3355 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3163 vs 2604 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: NVIDIA RTX A4000
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070
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 RTX A4000 | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 19545 | 22253 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 1026 | 999 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 121768 | 123479 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 420.465 | 453.922 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 4156.52 | 5803.174 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 32.297 | 40.757 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 162.131 | 182.055 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1895.111 | 1664.554 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 22050 | 31716 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 | 13566 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 | 31930 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 22050 | 31716 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 | 13566 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 | 31930 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2604 | 3163 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
NVIDIA RTX A4000 | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 | |
---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
Architektur | Ampere | Ampere |
Codename | GA104 | GA104 |
Startdatum | 12 Apr 2021 | 1 Sep 2020 |
Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 108 | 44 |
Einführungspreis (MSRP) | $499 | |
Typ | Desktop | |
Technische Info |
||
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1560 MHz | 1725 MHz |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 735 MHz | 1500 MHz |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 8 nm | 8 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 599.0 GFLOPS (1:32) | 317.4 GFLOPS (1:64) |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 19.17 TFLOPS (1:1) | 20.31 TFLOPS (1:1) |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 19.17 TFLOPS | 20.31 TFLOPS |
Leitungssysteme | 6144 | 5888 |
Pixel fill rate | 149.8 GPixel/s | 165.6 GPixel/s |
Texturfüllrate | 299.5 GTexel/s | 317.4 GTexel/s |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 140 Watt | 220 Watt |
Anzahl der Transistoren | 17400 million | 17400 million |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
Display-Anschlüsse | 4x DisplayPort | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
Formfaktor | Single-slot | Dual-slot |
Schnittstelle | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
Länge | 241 mm (9.5 inches) | 242 mm, 9.5 inches |
Empfohlene Systemleistung (PSU) | 300 Watt | 550 Watt |
Zusätzliche Leistungssteckverbinder | 1x 6-pin | 1x 12-pin |
Breite | 112 mm (4.4 inches) | 112 mm, 4.4 inches |
Höhe | 112 mm (4.4 inches) | |
API-Unterstützung |
||
DirectX | 12.2 | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
OpenCL | 3.0 | 3.0 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Shader Model | 6.6 | 6.7 |
Vulkan | ||
Speicher |
||
Maximale RAM-Belastung | 16 GB | 8 GB |
Speicherbandbreite | 448 GB/s | 448.0 GB/s |
Breite des Speicherbusses | 256 bit | 256 bit |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) | 1750 MHz, 14 Gbps effective |
Speichertyp | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |