AMD FirePro W7100 versus AMD Radeon R9 270X
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD FirePro W7100 and AMD Radeon R9 270X 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 W7100
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 10 mois plus tard
- Environ 23% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 103.0 GTexel / s versus 84 GTexel / s
- Environ 40% de pipelines plus haut: 1792 versus 1280
- Environ 23% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 3,297 gflops versus 2,688 gflops
- 4x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 8 GB versus 2 GB
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 5264 versus 4870
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 672 versus 613
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 65.781 versus 63.87
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 94.086 versus 85.21
- Environ 15% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 361.58 versus 315.412
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 12 August 2014 versus 8 October 2013 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 103.0 GTexel / s versus 84 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 1792 versus 1280 |
Performance á point flottant | 3,297 gflops versus 2,688 gflops |
Taille de mémore maximale | 8 GB versus 2 GB |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 5264 versus 4870 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 672 versus 613 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 65.781 versus 63.87 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 94.086 versus 85.21 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 361.58 versus 315.412 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3713 versus 3706 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 versus 3350 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3713 versus 3706 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 versus 3350 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 270X
- 2.2x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 180 Watt versus 400 Watt
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1314.72 versus 1248.285
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 6.354 versus 5.854
- Environ 27% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8068 versus 6362
- Environ 27% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8068 versus 6362
Caractéristiques | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 180 Watt versus 400 Watt |
Référence | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1314.72 versus 1248.285 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.354 versus 5.854 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8068 versus 6362 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8068 versus 6362 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD FirePro W7100
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 270X
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 W7100 | AMD Radeon R9 270X |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 5264 | 4870 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 672 | 613 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 24794 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 65.781 | 63.87 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1248.285 | 1314.72 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.854 | 6.354 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 94.086 | 85.21 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 361.58 | 315.412 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6362 | 8068 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3713 | 3706 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 | 3350 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6362 | 8068 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3713 | 3706 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 | 3350 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1772 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
AMD FirePro W7100 | AMD Radeon R9 270X | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | GCN 3.0 | GCN 1.0 |
Nom de code | Tonga | Curacao |
Date de sortie | 12 August 2014 | 8 October 2013 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 451 | 453 |
Genre | Workstation | Desktop |
Conception | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $199 | |
Prix maintenant | $399 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 16.05 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse du noyau | 920 MHz | |
Performance á point flottant | 3,297 gflops | 2,688 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 1792 | 1280 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 103.0 GTexel / s | 84 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 400 Watt | 180 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 5,000 million | 2,800 million |
Vitesse augmenté | 1050 MHz | |
Stream Processors | 1280 | |
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 / Full Length | |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Longeur | 241 mm | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 6-pin | 2 x 6-pin |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 12 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 8 GB | 2 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 160 GB / s | 179.2 GB/s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 5000 MHz | |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
AppAcceleration | ||
CrossFire | ||
DDMA audio | ||
FreeSync | ||
HD3D | ||
LiquidVR | ||
TressFX | ||
TrueAudio | ||
Unified Video Decoder (UVD) |