NVIDIA RTX A5000 vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200
Vergleichende Analyse von NVIDIA RTX A5000 und AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 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).
Unterschiede
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der NVIDIA RTX A5000
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 2 Jahr(e) 7 Monat(e) später
- Etwa 11% höhere Boost-Taktfrequenz: 1695 MHz vs 1530 MHz
- Ein neuerer Herstellungsprozess ermöglicht eine leistungsfähigere, aber dennoch kühlere Grafikkarte: 8 nm vs 14 nm
- Etwa 65% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 22961 vs 13932
- Etwa 27% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 1039 vs 815
- 2.2x bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 154648 vs 69812
- 3.4x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 581.432 vs 171.616
- Etwa 70% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 6836.931 vs 4031.404
- 3.2x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 54.372 vs 16.925
- Etwa 70% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 2038.811 vs 1195.863
- Etwa 73% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 22508 vs 13044
- Etwa 73% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 22508 vs 13044
Spezifikationen | |
Startdatum | 12 Apr 2021 vs 13 August 2018 |
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1695 MHz vs 1530 MHz |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 8 nm vs 14 nm |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 22961 vs 13932 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 1039 vs 815 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 154648 vs 69812 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 581.432 vs 171.616 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 6836.931 vs 4031.404 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 54.372 vs 16.925 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 2038.811 vs 1195.863 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 22508 vs 13044 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 22508 vs 13044 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200
- Etwa 3% höhere Kerntaktfrequenz:1200 MHz vs 1170 MHz
- Etwa 29% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 247.788 vs 191.518
- Etwa 93% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 7164 vs 3714
- 9.2x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 30936 vs 3355
- Etwa 93% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 7164 vs 3714
- 9.2x bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 30936 vs 3355
Spezifikationen | |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 1200 MHz vs 1170 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 247.788 vs 191.518 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 7164 vs 3714 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 30936 vs 3355 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 7164 vs 3714 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 30936 vs 3355 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: NVIDIA RTX A5000
GPU 2: AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200
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 RTX A5000 | AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 22961 | 13932 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 1039 | 815 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 154648 | 69812 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 581.432 | 171.616 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 6836.931 | 4031.404 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 54.372 | 16.925 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 191.518 | 247.788 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 2038.811 | 1195.863 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 22508 | 13044 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 | 7164 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 | 30936 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 22508 | 13044 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 | 7164 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 | 30936 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
NVIDIA RTX A5000 | AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 | |
---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
Architektur | Ampere | GCN 5.0 |
Codename | GA102 | Vega 10 |
Startdatum | 12 Apr 2021 | 13 August 2018 |
Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 65 | 118 |
Einführungspreis (MSRP) | $999 | |
Jetzt kaufen | $999 | |
Typ | Workstation | |
Preis-Leistungs-Verhältnis (0-100) | 13.37 | |
Technische Info |
||
Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1695 MHz | 1530 MHz |
Kerntaktfrequenz | 1170 MHz | 1200 MHz |
Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 8 nm | 14 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 867.8 GFLOPS (1:32) | |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 27.77 TFLOPS (1:1) | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 27.77 TFLOPS | |
Leitungssysteme | 8192 | |
Pixel fill rate | 162.7 GPixel/s | |
Texturfüllrate | 433.9 GTexel/s | |
Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 230 Watt | 230 Watt |
Anzahl der Transistoren | 28300 million | 12,500 million |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
Display-Anschlüsse | 4x DisplayPort | 4x mini-DisplayPort |
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
Formfaktor | Dual-slot | |
Schnittstelle | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Länge | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | 267 mm |
Empfohlene Systemleistung (PSU) | 550 Watt | |
Zusätzliche Leistungssteckverbinder | 1x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
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 | 24 GB | |
Speicherbandbreite | 768 GB/s | |
Breite des Speicherbusses | 384 bit | |
Speichertaktfrequenz | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) | 2000 MHz |
Speichertyp | GDDR6 |