AMD FirePro W4100 versus NVIDIA GRID K2
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD FirePro W4100 and NVIDIA GRID K2 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 W4100
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 3 mois plus tard
- 4.5x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 50 Watt versus 225 Watt
- Environ 42% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 453 versus 319
- 9.9x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3399 versus 344
- 5.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 1620 versus 312
- 9.9x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3399 versus 344
- 5.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 1620 versus 312
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 13 August 2014 versus 11 May 2013 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt versus 225 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 453 versus 319 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3399 versus 344 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1620 versus 312 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3399 versus 344 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1620 versus 312 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GRID K2
- Environ 18% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 745 MHz versus 630 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 2x 95.36 GTexel / s billion / sec versus 20.16 GTexel / s
- 6x plus de pipelines: 2x 1536 versus 512
- 7.1x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2x 2,289 gflops versus 645.1 gflops
- 4x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 2x 4 GB versus 2 GB
- Environ 25% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 5000 MHz versus 4000 MHz
- Environ 82% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 2737 versus 1504
- Environ 94% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 10581 versus 5447
- Environ 21% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 18.948 versus 15.65
- Environ 80% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 968.568 versus 538.848
- Environ 58% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.58 versus 1.631
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 32.988 versus 31.533
- Environ 52% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 114.144 versus 75.309
- 3.3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6371 versus 1951
- 3.3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6371 versus 1951
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 745 MHz versus 630 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 2x 95.36 GTexel / s billion / sec versus 20.16 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 2x 1536 versus 512 |
| Performance á point flottant | 2x 2,289 gflops versus 645.1 gflops |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 2x 4 GB versus 2 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5000 MHz versus 4000 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2737 versus 1504 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 10581 versus 5447 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 18.948 versus 15.65 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 968.568 versus 538.848 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.58 versus 1.631 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 32.988 versus 31.533 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 114.144 versus 75.309 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6371 versus 1951 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6371 versus 1951 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD FirePro W4100
GPU 2: NVIDIA GRID K2
| 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 W4100 | NVIDIA GRID K2 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1504 | 2737 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 453 | 319 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5447 | 10581 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 15.65 | 18.948 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 538.848 | 968.568 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.631 | 2.58 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 31.533 | 32.988 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 75.309 | 114.144 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1951 | 6371 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3399 | 344 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1620 | 312 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1951 | 6371 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3399 | 344 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1620 | 312 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD FirePro W4100 | NVIDIA GRID K2 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |
| Nom de code | Cape Verde | GK104 |
| Date de sortie | 13 August 2014 | 11 May 2013 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 965 | 967 |
| Genre | Workstation | Workstation |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $5,199 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse du noyau | 630 MHz | 745 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 645.1 gflops | 2x 2,289 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 512 | 2x 1536 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 20.16 GTexel / s | 2x 95.36 GTexel / s billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 225 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,500 million | 3,540 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 4x mini-DisplayPort | No outputs |
| 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 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 171 mm | 267 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 1x 8-pin |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 2x 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 72 GB / s | 2x 160.0 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 2x 256 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4000 MHz | 5000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| AppAcceleration | ||
| Powerplay | ||