AMD FirePro W2100 versus NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD FirePro W2100 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M 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 W2100
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 4 mois plus tard
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 2 GB versus 1 GB
- Environ 31% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 314 versus 239
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 10.438 versus 9.947
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.991 versus 0.982
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 19.794 versus 18.773
- 2.2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 50.338 versus 23.111
- Environ 75% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3346 versus 1913
- Environ 75% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3346 versus 1913
- 2.6x meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1058 versus 414
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 12 August 2014 versus 22 March 2012 |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 2 GB versus 1 GB |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 314 versus 239 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 10.438 versus 9.947 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.991 versus 0.982 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 19.794 versus 18.773 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 50.338 versus 23.111 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3346 versus 1913 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3346 versus 1913 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1058 versus 414 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M
- Environ 40% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 950 MHz versus 680 MHz
- Environ 20% de pipelines plus haut: 384 versus 320
- Environ 50% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 652.8 gflops versus 435.2 gflops
- 8.9x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 45 Watt versus 400 Watt
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1202 versus 856
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 3802 versus 3750
- Environ 18% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 340.824 versus 289.646
- Environ 53% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2283 versus 1494
- Environ 42% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3299 versus 2329
- Environ 53% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2283 versus 1494
- Environ 42% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3299 versus 2329
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse augmenté | 950 MHz versus 680 MHz |
| Pipelines | 384 versus 320 |
| Performance á point flottant | 652.8 gflops versus 435.2 gflops |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt versus 400 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1202 versus 856 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3802 versus 3750 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 340.824 versus 289.646 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2283 versus 1494 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3299 versus 2329 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2283 versus 1494 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3299 versus 2329 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD FirePro W2100
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M
| 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 |
|
|
| Nom | AMD FirePro W2100 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 856 | 1202 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 314 | 239 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3750 | 3802 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 10.438 | 9.947 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 289.646 | 340.824 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.991 | 0.982 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 19.794 | 18.773 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 50.338 | 23.111 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1494 | 2283 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2329 | 3299 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3346 | 1913 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1494 | 2283 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2329 | 3299 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3346 | 1913 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1058 | 414 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD FirePro W2100 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |
| Nom de code | Oland | GK107 |
| Date de sortie | 12 August 2014 | 22 March 2012 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1185 | 1188 |
| Genre | Workstation | Laptop |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 680 MHz | 950 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 630 MHz | |
| Performance á point flottant | 435.2 gflops | 652.8 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 320 | 384 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 13.6 GTexel / s | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 400 Watt | 45 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,040 million | 1,270 million |
| Noyaux CUDA | 384 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 2x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| Compte DisplayPort | 2 | |
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| HDCP | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Résolution VGA maximale | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0 |
| Facteur de forme | Low Profile / Half Length | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
| Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12 API |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 1 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 28.8 GB / s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1800 MHz | 1800 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | n / a | DDR3\GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
| AppAcceleration | ||
| Powerplay | ||
| 3D Blu-Ray | ||
| 3D Vision | ||
| CUDA | ||
| DirectCompute | ||
| DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
| Optimus | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD FirePro W2100 avec des autres
AMDFirePro W2100 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 650M
AMDFirePro W2100 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 645M
AMDFirePro W2100 vs
AMDRadeon R6 M255DX
AMDFirePro W2100 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 940M
AMDFirePro W2100 vs
AMDRadeon R8 M350DX
AMDFirePro W2100 vs
AMDRadeon R5 M430
