AMD FirePro W5100 versus AMD Radeon R7 260X
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD FirePro W5100 and AMD Radeon R7 260X 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 W5100
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 5 mois plus tard
- 2.3x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 50 Watt versus 115 Watt
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 544 versus 521
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 838.518 versus 804.436
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4397 versus 3845
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3688 versus 3485
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4397 versus 3845
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3688 versus 3485
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 31 March 2014 versus 8 October 2013 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt versus 115 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 544 versus 521 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 838.518 versus 804.436 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4397 versus 3845 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3688 versus 3485 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4397 versus 3845 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3688 versus 3485 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R7 260X
- Environ 38% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 61.6 GTexel / s versus 44.64 GTexel / s
- Environ 17% de pipelines plus haut: 896 versus 768
- Environ 38% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,971 gflops versus 1,428 gflops
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3183 versus 2990
- Environ 24% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 43.745 versus 35.15
- Environ 15% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.673 versus 3.199
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 64.088 versus 57.354
- Environ 36% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 221.539 versus 163.258
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 61.6 GTexel / s versus 44.64 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 896 versus 768 |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,971 gflops versus 1,428 gflops |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3183 versus 2990 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 43.745 versus 35.15 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.673 versus 3.199 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 64.088 versus 57.354 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 221.539 versus 163.258 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 3356 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 3356 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD FirePro W5100
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 260X
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| 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 W5100 | AMD Radeon R7 260X |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2990 | 3183 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 544 | 521 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 12142 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 35.15 | 43.745 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 838.518 | 804.436 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.199 | 3.673 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 57.354 | 64.088 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 163.258 | 221.539 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4397 | 3845 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3688 | 3485 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 | 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4397 | 3845 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3688 | 3485 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 | 3358 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1481 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD FirePro W5100 | AMD Radeon R7 260X | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | GCN 2.0 |
| Nom de code | Bonaire | Bonaire |
| Date de sortie | 31 March 2014 | 8 October 2013 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 637 | 639 |
| Genre | Workstation | Desktop |
| Conception | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series | |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $139 | |
| Prix maintenant | $239 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 17.15 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse du noyau | 930 MHz | |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,428 gflops | 1,971 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 768 | 896 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 44.64 GTexel / s | 61.6 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 115 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 2,080 million | 2,080 million |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1000 MHz | |
| Stream Processors | 896 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 4x DisplayPort | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| Compte DisplayPort | 4 | |
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| Sortie du composant vidéo HD | ||
| StereoOutput3D | ||
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Facteur de forme | Full Height / Half Length | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 171 mm | 170 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 1 x 6-pin |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 96 GB / s | 104 GB/s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 6000 MHz | |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| DDMA audio | ||
| FreeSync | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD FirePro W5100 avec des autres
AMDFirePro W5100 vs
NVIDIAQuadro NVS 210S
AMDFirePro W5100 vs
AMDRadeon R7 260X
AMDFirePro W5100 vs
NVIDIATesla K40m
AMDFirePro W5100 vs
AMDRadeon R7 M270DX
AMDFirePro W5100 vs
AMDRadeon R7 360
AMDFirePro W5100 vs
AMDFirePro S7150
