AMD FirePro V3900 versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD FirePro V3900 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570M 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).
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD FirePro V3900
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 7 mois plus tard
- Environ 13% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 650 MHz versus 575 MHz
- Environ 43% de pipelines plus haut: 480 versus 336
- Environ 20% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 1800 MHz versus 1500 MHz
- 4.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1311 versus 296
- 3.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1631 versus 475
- 5.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 versus 657
- 4.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1311 versus 296
- 3.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1631 versus 475
- 5.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 versus 657
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 7 February 2012 versus 28 June 2011 |
Vitesse du noyau | 650 MHz versus 575 MHz |
Pipelines | 480 versus 336 |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1800 MHz versus 1500 MHz |
Référence | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1311 versus 296 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1631 versus 475 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 657 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1311 versus 296 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1631 versus 475 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 657 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570M
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 32.2 billion / sec versus 15.6 GTexel / s
- Environ 24% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 772.8 gflops versus 624.0 gflops
- 2.7x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 75 Watt versus 199 Watt
- Environ 50% plus de taille maximale de mémoire: 1536 MB versus 1 GB
- 2.9x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1864 versus 640
- Environ 51% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 358 versus 237
- 3.6x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 5696 versus 1564
- 3.2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 14.911 versus 4.646
- Environ 91% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 533.677 versus 279.435
- 3.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.681 versus 0.468
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 31.229 versus 13.784
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 66.187 versus 58.58
Caractéristiques | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 32.2 billion / sec versus 15.6 GTexel / s |
Performance á point flottant | 772.8 gflops versus 624.0 gflops |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt versus 199 Watt |
Taille de mémore maximale | 1536 MB versus 1 GB |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1864 versus 640 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 358 versus 237 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 5696 versus 1564 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 14.911 versus 4.646 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 533.677 versus 279.435 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.681 versus 0.468 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 31.229 versus 13.784 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 66.187 versus 58.58 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD FirePro V3900
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570M
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 V3900 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 640 | 1864 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 237 | 358 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 1564 | 5696 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 4.646 | 14.911 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 279.435 | 533.677 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.468 | 1.681 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 13.784 | 31.229 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 58.58 | 66.187 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1311 | 296 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1631 | 475 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 657 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1311 | 296 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1631 | 475 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 657 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
AMD FirePro V3900 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570M | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | TeraScale 2 | Fermi 2.0 |
Nom de code | Turks | GF114 |
Date de sortie | 7 February 2012 | 28 June 2011 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1347 | 1349 |
Genre | Workstation | Laptop |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse du noyau | 650 MHz | 575 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 624.0 gflops | 772.8 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 40 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 480 | 336 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 15.6 GTexel / s | 32.2 billion / sec |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 199 Watt | 75 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 716 million | 1,950 million |
Noyaux CUDA | 336 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
Compte DisplayPort | 1 | |
Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
Sortie du composant vidéo HD | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Soutien de bus | PCIe 2.1 x16 | PCI-E 2.0 |
Facteur de forme | Half Height / Half Length | |
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
Longeur | 168 mm | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
Taille du laptop | large | |
Options SLI | 2-way | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 API |
OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.5 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 1 GB | 1536 MB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 28 GB / s | 72.0 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 192 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1800 MHz | 1500 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR3 | GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Blu-Ray | ||
3D Gaming | ||
3D Vision | ||
CUDA | ||
DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
Optimus | ||
SLI |