AMD FirePro W4100 versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 645 OEM
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD FirePro W4100 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 645 OEM 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
- Environ 30% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 50 Watt versus 65 Watt
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 2 GB versus 1 GB
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 456 versus 431
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 5489 versus 5220
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 15.65 versus 13.806
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.631 versus 1.535
- Environ 15% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 31.533 versus 27.524
- Environ 95% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 75.309 versus 38.664
- Environ 36% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1951 versus 1435
- Environ 36% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1951 versus 1435
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 13 August 2014 versus 22 April 2013 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt versus 65 Watt |
Taille de mémore maximale | 2 GB versus 1 GB |
Référence | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 456 versus 431 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 5489 versus 5220 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 15.65 versus 13.806 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.631 versus 1.535 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 31.533 versus 27.524 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 75.309 versus 38.664 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1951 versus 1435 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1951 versus 1435 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 645 OEM
- Environ 31% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 824 MHz versus 630 MHz
- Environ 96% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 39.55 GTexel / s versus 20.16 GTexel / s
- Environ 13% de pipelines plus haut: 576 versus 512
- Environ 47% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 949.2 gflops versus 645.1 gflops
- Environ 24% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1882 versus 1516
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 546.51 versus 538.848
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3531 versus 3399
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3300 versus 1620
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3531 versus 3399
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3300 versus 1620
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 824 MHz versus 630 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 39.55 GTexel / s versus 20.16 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 576 versus 512 |
Performance á point flottant | 949.2 gflops versus 645.1 gflops |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1882 versus 1516 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 546.51 versus 538.848 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3531 versus 3399 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3300 versus 1620 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3531 versus 3399 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3300 versus 1620 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD FirePro W4100
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 645 OEM
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 GeForce GTX 645 OEM |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1516 | 1882 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 456 | 431 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 5489 | 5220 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 15.65 | 13.806 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 538.848 | 546.51 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.631 | 1.535 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 31.533 | 27.524 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 75.309 | 38.664 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1951 | 1435 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3399 | 3531 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1620 | 3300 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1951 | 1435 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3399 | 3531 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1620 | 3300 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
AMD FirePro W4100 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 645 OEM | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |
Nom de code | Cape Verde | GK106 |
Date de sortie | 13 August 2014 | 22 April 2013 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 966 | 967 |
Genre | Workstation | Desktop |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse du noyau | 630 MHz | 824 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 645.1 gflops | 949.2 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 512 | 576 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 20.16 GTexel / s | 39.55 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 65 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 1,500 million | 2,540 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | 4x mini-DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
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 | 147 mm |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 2 GB | 1 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 72 GB / s | 64 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 4000 MHz | 4000 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
AppAcceleration | ||
Powerplay |