NVIDIA RTX A4000 vs NVIDIA Quadro P1000
Vergleichende Analyse von NVIDIA RTX A4000 und NVIDIA Quadro P1000 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 4 Jahr(e) 2 Monat(e) später
- Etwa 5% höhere Boost-Taktfrequenz: 1560 MHz vs 1480 MHz
- 5059.1x mehr Texturfüllrate: 299.5 GTexel/s vs 59.2 GTexel / s
- 12x mehr Leitungssysteme: 6144 vs 512
- Ein neuerer Herstellungsprozess ermöglicht eine leistungsfähigere, aber dennoch kühlere Grafikkarte: 8 nm vs 14 nm
- 4x mehr maximale Speichergröße: 16 GB vs 4 GB
- 4.3x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 19545 vs 4500
- Etwa 74% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 1026 vs 590
- 7.8x bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 121768 vs 15667
- 5.9x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 420.465 vs 71.86
- 5x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 4156.52 vs 832.248
- 8x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 32.297 vs 4.039
- 2.5x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 162.131 vs 65.117
- 7.7x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 1895.111 vs 245.081
- 3.2x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 22050 vs 6796
- 3.2x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 22050 vs 6796
- Etwa 64% bessere Leistung in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 2604 vs 1591
Spezifikationen | |
Startdatum | 12 Apr 2021 vs 7 February 2017 |
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1560 MHz vs 1480 MHz |
Texturfüllrate | 299.5 GTexel/s vs 59.2 GTexel / s |
Leitungssysteme | 6144 vs 512 |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 8 nm vs 14 nm |
Maximale Speichergröße | 16 GB vs 4 GB |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 19545 vs 4500 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 1026 vs 590 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 121768 vs 15667 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 420.465 vs 71.86 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 4156.52 vs 832.248 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 32.297 vs 4.039 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 162.131 vs 65.117 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1895.111 vs 245.081 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 22050 vs 6796 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 vs 3702 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 vs 3348 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 22050 vs 6796 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 vs 3702 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 vs 3348 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2604 vs 1591 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der NVIDIA Quadro P1000
- Etwa 72% höhere Kerntaktfrequenz:1266 MHz vs 735 MHz
- 3x geringere typische Leistungsaufnahme: 47 Watt vs 140 Watt
- 2.9x mehr Speichertaktfrequenz: 5012 MHz vs 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective)
Kerntaktfrequenz | 1266 MHz vs 735 MHz |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 47 Watt vs 140 Watt |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 5012 MHz vs 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: NVIDIA RTX A4000
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro P1000
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 Quadro P1000 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 19545 | 4500 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 1026 | 590 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 121768 | 15667 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 420.465 | 71.86 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 4156.52 | 832.248 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 32.297 | 4.039 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 162.131 | 65.117 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1895.111 | 245.081 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 22050 | 6796 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 | 3702 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 | 3348 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 22050 | 6796 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 | 3702 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 | 3348 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2604 | 1591 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
NVIDIA RTX A4000 | NVIDIA Quadro P1000 | |
---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
Architektur | Ampere | Pascal |
Codename | GA104 | GP107 |
Startdatum | 12 Apr 2021 | 7 February 2017 |
Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 108 | 517 |
Einführungspreis (MSRP) | $375 | |
Jetzt kaufen | $319.99 | |
Typ | Workstation | |
Preis-Leistungs-Verhältnis (0-100) | 15.53 | |
Technische Info |
||
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1560 MHz | 1480 MHz |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 735 MHz | 1266 MHz |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 8 nm | 14 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 599.0 GFLOPS (1:32) | |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 19.17 TFLOPS (1:1) | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 19.17 TFLOPS | |
Leitungssysteme | 6144 | 512 |
Pixel fill rate | 149.8 GPixel/s | |
Texturfüllrate | 299.5 GTexel/s | 59.2 GTexel / s |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 140 Watt | 47 Watt |
Anzahl der Transistoren | 17400 million | 3,300 million |
Gleitkomma-Leistung | 1,894 gflops | |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
Display-Anschlüsse | 4x DisplayPort | 4x mini-DisplayPort |
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
Formfaktor | Single-slot | |
Schnittstelle | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Länge | 241 mm (9.5 inches) | 145 mm |
Empfohlene Systemleistung (PSU) | 300 Watt | |
Zusätzliche Leistungssteckverbinder | 1x 6-pin | None |
Breite | 112 mm (4.4 inches) | |
API-Unterstützung |
||
DirectX | 12.2 | 12.0 (12_1) |
OpenCL | 3.0 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Shader Model | 6.6 | |
Vulkan | ||
Speicher |
||
Maximale RAM-Belastung | 16 GB | 4 GB |
Speicherbandbreite | 448 GB/s | 80.19 GB / s |
Breite des Speicherbusses | 256 bit | 128 Bit |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) | 5012 MHz |
Speichertyp | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |