AMD Radeon R9 255 OEM vs NVIDIA Quadro 500M
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R9 255 OEM and NVIDIA Quadro 500M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 255 OEM
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 9 month(s) later
- Around 29% higher core clock speed: 900 MHz vs 700 MHz
- 2.7x more texture fill rate: 29.76 GTexel / s vs 11.2 GTexel / s
- 5.3x more pipelines: 512 vs 96
- 3.5x better floating-point performance: 952.3 gflops vs 268.8 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
- 2x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1 GB
- 2.6x more memory clock speed: 4600 MHz vs 1800 MHz
- Around 6% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 388 vs 365
- 2.5x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1420 vs 571
- 4.7x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 40722 vs 8743
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 21 December 2013 vs 22 February 2011 |
Core clock speed | 900 MHz vs 700 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 29.76 GTexel / s vs 11.2 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 512 vs 96 |
Floating-point performance | 952.3 gflops vs 268.8 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 40 nm |
Maximum memory size | 2 GB vs 1 GB |
Memory clock speed | 4600 MHz vs 1800 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 388 vs 365 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1420 vs 571 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 40722 vs 8743 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro 500M
- Around 86% lower typical power consumption: 35 Watt vs 65 Watt
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt vs 65 Watt |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 255 OEM
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro 500M
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon R9 255 OEM | NVIDIA Quadro 500M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G2D Mark | 388 | 365 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1420 | 571 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 40722 | 8743 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3112 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3112 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3168 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3168 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3346 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3346 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon R9 255 OEM | NVIDIA Quadro 500M | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Fermi |
Code name | Cape Verde | GF108 |
Launch date | 21 December 2013 | 22 February 2011 |
Place in performance rating | 606 | 608 |
Type | Desktop | Workstation |
Price now | $275.14 | |
Value for money (0-100) | 3.18 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 930 MHz | |
Core clock speed | 900 MHz | 700 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 952.3 gflops | 268.8 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 512 | 96 |
Texture fill rate | 29.76 GTexel / s | 11.2 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt | 35 Watt |
Transistor count | 1,500 million | 585 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-A (3.0) |
Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 1 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 73.6 GB / s | 28.8 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 4600 MHz | 1800 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |