AMD FirePro W2100 versus NVIDIA Quadro K2000
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD FirePro W2100 and NVIDIA Quadro K2000 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 1 ans 5 mois plus tard
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 289.646 versus 265.424
- Environ 32% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 19.794 versus 15.009
- Environ 32% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 50.338 versus 38.219
- Environ 43% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2329 versus 1631
- Environ 70% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3346 versus 1974
- Environ 43% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2329 versus 1631
- Environ 70% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3346 versus 1974
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 12 August 2014 versus 1 March 2013 |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 289.646 versus 265.424 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 19.794 versus 15.009 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 50.338 versus 38.219 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2329 versus 1631 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3346 versus 1974 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2329 versus 1631 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3346 versus 1974 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro K2000
- Environ 51% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 954 MHz versus 630 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 30.53 GTexel / s versus 13.6 GTexel / s
- Environ 20% de pipelines plus haut: 384 versus 320
- Environ 68% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 732.7 gflops versus 435.2 gflops
- 7.8x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 51 Watt versus 400 Watt
- 2.2x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 4000 MHz versus 1800 MHz
- Environ 82% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1580 versus 869
- Environ 21% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 384 versus 318
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 4071 versus 3724
- Environ 37% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 14.332 versus 10.438
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.093 versus 0.991
- Environ 64% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2446 versus 1494
- Environ 64% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2446 versus 1494
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 954 MHz versus 630 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 30.53 GTexel / s versus 13.6 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 384 versus 320 |
| Performance á point flottant | 732.7 gflops versus 435.2 gflops |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 51 Watt versus 400 Watt |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4000 MHz versus 1800 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1580 versus 869 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 384 versus 318 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 4071 versus 3724 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 14.332 versus 10.438 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.093 versus 0.991 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2446 versus 1494 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2446 versus 1494 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD FirePro W2100
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K2000
| 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 W2100 | NVIDIA Quadro K2000 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 869 | 1580 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 318 | 384 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3724 | 4071 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 10.438 | 14.332 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 289.646 | 265.424 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.991 | 1.093 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 19.794 | 15.009 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 50.338 | 38.219 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1494 | 2446 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2329 | 1631 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3346 | 1974 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1494 | 2446 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2329 | 1631 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3346 | 1974 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1058 | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD FirePro W2100 | NVIDIA Quadro K2000 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |
| Nom de code | Oland | GK107 |
| Date de sortie | 12 August 2014 | 1 March 2013 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1211 | 1212 |
| Genre | Workstation | Workstation |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $599 | |
| Prix maintenant | $164.99 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 11.74 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 680 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 630 MHz | 954 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 435.2 gflops | 732.7 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 320 | 384 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 13.6 GTexel / s | 30.53 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 400 Watt | 51 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,040 million | 1,270 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 2x DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort |
| Compte DisplayPort | 2 | |
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | |
| Facteur de forme | Low Profile / Half Length | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
| Longeur | 202 mm | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 28.8 GB / s | 64 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1800 MHz | 4000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | n / a | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| AppAcceleration | ||
| Powerplay | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD FirePro W2100 avec des autres
AMDFirePro W2100 vs
ATIRadeon 9800 SE
AMDFirePro W2100 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 645M
AMDFirePro W2100 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 625M
AMDFirePro W2100 vs
NVIDIAQuadro K2000
AMDFirePro W2100 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 950 OEM
AMDFirePro W2100 vs
AMDRadeon R5 430 OEM
