NVIDIA Quadro P4000 vs NVIDIA Tesla P4
Vergleichende Analyse von NVIDIA Quadro P4000 und NVIDIA Tesla P4 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 P4000
- Grafikkarte ist neuer: Startdatum 4 Monat(e) später
- Etwa 48% höhere Kerntaktfrequenz:1202 MHz vs 810 MHz
- Etwa 39% höhere Boost-Taktfrequenz: 1480 MHz vs 1063 MHz
- Etwa 27% höhere Speichertaktfrequenz: 7604 MHz vs 6008 MHz
- Etwa 27% bessere Leistung in PassMark - G3D Mark: 11545 vs 9097
- 2x bessere Leistung in PassMark - G2D Mark: 795 vs 391
- Etwa 12% bessere Leistung in Geekbench - OpenCL: 42289 vs 37924
- Etwa 3% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 152.325 vs 147.62
- Etwa 20% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 11.365 vs 9.457
- Etwa 44% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 751.626 vs 523.29
- Etwa 34% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 15267 vs 11409
- Etwa 1% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 3341
- Etwa 34% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 15267 vs 11409
- Etwa 1% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 3341
| Spezifikationen | |
| Startdatum | 6 February 2017 vs 13 September 2016 |
| Kerntaktfrequenz | 1202 MHz vs 810 MHz |
| Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1480 MHz vs 1063 MHz |
| Speichertaktfrequenz | 7604 MHz vs 6008 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 11545 vs 9097 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 795 vs 391 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 42289 vs 37924 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 152.325 vs 147.62 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 11.365 vs 9.457 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 751.626 vs 523.29 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 15267 vs 11409 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 vs 3698 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 3341 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 15267 vs 11409 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 vs 3698 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 3341 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der NVIDIA Tesla P4
- Etwa 3% höhere Texturfüllrate: 170.1 GTexel / s vs 165.8 GTexel / s
- Etwa 43% höhere Leitungssysteme: 2560 vs 1792
- Etwa 3% bessere Gleitkomma-Leistung: 5,443 gflops vs 5,304 gflops
- Etwa 33% geringere typische Leistungsaufnahme: 75 Watt vs 100 Watt
- Etwa 13% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1791.761 vs 1590.392
- 2.2x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 99.574 vs 45.977
| Spezifikationen | |
| Texturfüllrate | 170.1 GTexel / s vs 165.8 GTexel / s |
| Leitungssysteme | 2560 vs 1792 |
| Gleitkomma-Leistung | 5,443 gflops vs 5,304 gflops |
| Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 75 Watt vs 100 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1791.761 vs 1590.392 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 99.574 vs 45.977 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P4000
GPU 2: NVIDIA Tesla P4
| 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 P4000 | NVIDIA Tesla P4 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 11545 | 9097 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 795 | 391 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 42289 | 37924 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 152.325 | 147.62 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1590.392 | 1791.761 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 11.365 | 9.457 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 45.977 | 99.574 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 751.626 | 523.29 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 15267 | 11409 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 | 3698 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3341 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 15267 | 11409 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 | 3698 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3341 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1115 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
| NVIDIA Quadro P4000 | NVIDIA Tesla P4 | |
|---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
| Architektur | Pascal | Pascal |
| Codename | GP104 | GP104 |
| Startdatum | 6 February 2017 | 13 September 2016 |
| Einführungspreis (MSRP) | $815 | |
| Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 287 | 349 |
| Jetzt kaufen | $799.99 | |
| Typ | Workstation | Workstation |
| Preis-Leistungs-Verhältnis (0-100) | 17.17 | |
Technische Info |
||
| Boost-Taktfrequenz | 1480 MHz | 1063 MHz |
| Kerntaktfrequenz | 1202 MHz | 810 MHz |
| Gleitkomma-Leistung | 5,304 gflops | 5,443 gflops |
| Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 16 nm | 16 nm |
| Leitungssysteme | 1792 | 2560 |
| Texturfüllrate | 165.8 GTexel / s | 170.1 GTexel / s |
| Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 100 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Anzahl der Transistoren | 7,200 million | 7,200 million |
Videoausgänge und Anschlüsse |
||
| Display-Anschlüsse | 4x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| Display Port | 1.4 | |
Kompatibilität, Abmessungen und Anforderungen |
||
| Schnittstelle | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Länge | 241 mm | 267 mm |
| Zusätzliche Leistungssteckverbinder | 1x 6-pin | None |
API-Unterstützung |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Speicher |
||
| Maximale RAM-Belastung | 8 GB | 8 GB |
| Speicherbandbreite | 192 GB / s | 192.3 GB / s |
| Breite des Speicherbusses | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Speichertaktfrequenz | 7604 MHz | 6008 MHz |
| Speichertyp | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Gemeinsamer Speicher | 0 | |
Technologien |
||
| 3D Stereo | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView Display Management | ||
| Optimus | ||

