AMD FirePro M2000 versus NVIDIA GeForce GT 430
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD FirePro M2000 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 430 pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire, Technologies. Analyse du performance de référence des cartes vidéo: 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.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD FirePro M2000
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 8 mois plus tard
- Environ 7% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 12 GTexel / s versus 11.2 billion / sec
- 5x plus de pipelines: 480 versus 96
- Environ 79% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 480.0 gflops versus 268.8 gflops
- Environ 48% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 33 Watt versus 49 Watt
- 3.6x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 3200 MHz versus 800 - 900 MHz (1600 - 1800 data rate)
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 206 versus 198
- 2.2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 195.801 versus 87.094
- Environ 28% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.31 versus 0.243
- 2.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 10.402 versus 5.005
- 11.8x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 44.254 versus 3.764
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 1709 versus 1624
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 1709 versus 1624
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 1 July 2012 versus 11 October 2010 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 12 GTexel / s versus 11.2 billion / sec |
Pipelines | 480 versus 96 |
Performance á point flottant | 480.0 gflops versus 268.8 gflops |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 33 Watt versus 49 Watt |
Vitesse de mémoire | 3200 MHz versus 800 - 900 MHz (1600 - 1800 data rate) |
Référence | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 206 versus 198 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 195.801 versus 87.094 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.31 versus 0.243 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 10.402 versus 5.005 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 44.254 versus 3.764 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1709 versus 1624 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1709 versus 1624 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GT 430
- 2.8x plus de vitesse du noyau: 1400 MHz versus 500 MHz
- Environ 41% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 599 versus 425
- Environ 92% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 2242 versus 1168
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 3.396 versus 3.284
- Environ 99% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1080 versus 544
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1713 versus 1498
- Environ 99% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1080 versus 544
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1713 versus 1498
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 1400 MHz versus 500 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 599 versus 425 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 2242 versus 1168 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 3.396 versus 3.284 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1080 versus 544 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1713 versus 1498 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1080 versus 544 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1713 versus 1498 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD FirePro M2000
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 430
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) |
|
|
Nom | AMD FirePro M2000 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 430 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 425 | 599 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 206 | 198 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 1168 | 2242 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 3.284 | 3.396 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 195.801 | 87.094 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.31 | 0.243 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 10.402 | 5.005 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 44.254 | 3.764 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 544 | 1080 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1498 | 1713 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1709 | 1624 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 544 | 1080 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1498 | 1713 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1709 | 1624 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
AMD FirePro M2000 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 430 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | TeraScale 2 | Fermi |
Nom de code | Turks | GF108 |
Date de sortie | 1 July 2012 | 11 October 2010 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1498 | 1501 |
Genre | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $79 | |
Prix maintenant | $35.99 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 20.89 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse du noyau | 500 MHz | 1400 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 480.0 gflops | 268.8 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 40 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 480 | 96 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 12 GTexel / s | 11.2 billion / sec |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 33 Watt | 49 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 716 million | 585 million |
Noyaux CUDA par GPU | 96 | |
Température maximale du GPU | 98 °C | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA, HDMIVGA (optional)Mini HDMIDual Link DVI |
StereoOutput3D | ||
Contribution d’audio pour HDMI | Internal | |
HDMI | ||
Résolution VGA maximale | 2048x1536 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Soutien de bus | n / a | PCI-E 2.0 x 16 |
Facteur de forme | chip-down | |
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
Hauteur | 2.713" (6.9 cm) | |
Longeur | 5.7" (14.5 cm) | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.2 |
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 1 GB | 1 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 25.6 GB / s | 25.6 - 28.8 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 3200 MHz | 800 - 900 MHz (1600 - 1800 data rate) |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision | ||
CUDA |