AMD Radeon E6760 versus NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon E6760 and NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire, Sorties et ports de vidéo, 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 Radeon E6760
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 7 mois plus tard
- 2.5x plus de pipelines: 480 versus 192
- 2.4x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 45 Watt versus 106 Watt
- Environ 77% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 3200 MHz versus 1804 (3608 data rate) MHz
- Environ 57% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 485 versus 309
- Environ 98% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 9761 versus 4936
- Environ 89% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 52.148 versus 27.656
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3528 versus 3325
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3528 versus 3325
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 2 May 2011 versus 13 September 2010 |
Pipelines | 480 versus 192 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt versus 106 Watt |
Vitesse de mémoire | 3200 MHz versus 1804 (3608 data rate) MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 485 versus 309 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 9761 versus 4936 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 52.148 versus 27.656 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3528 versus 3325 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3528 versus 3325 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450
- 2.6x plus de vitesse du noyau: 1566 MHz versus 600 MHz
- Environ 74% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 25.1 billion / sec versus 14.4 GTexel / s
- Environ 4% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 601.3 gflops versus 576.0 gflops
- Environ 50% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1318 versus 877
- 4.7x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 14.758 versus 3.112
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 302.509 versus 293.065
- 2.2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.965 versus 0.445
- Environ 15% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 14.925 versus 13.002
- 2.6x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2160 versus 820
- Environ 73% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3365 versus 1945
- 2.6x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2160 versus 820
- Environ 73% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3365 versus 1945
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 1566 MHz versus 600 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 25.1 billion / sec versus 14.4 GTexel / s |
Performance á point flottant | 601.3 gflops versus 576.0 gflops |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1318 versus 877 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 14.758 versus 3.112 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 302.509 versus 293.065 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.965 versus 0.445 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 14.925 versus 13.002 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2160 versus 820 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3365 versus 1945 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2160 versus 820 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3365 versus 1945 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon E6760
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450
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 Radeon E6760 | NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 877 | 1318 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 485 | 309 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 9761 | 4936 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 3.112 | 14.758 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 293.065 | 302.509 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.445 | 0.965 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 13.002 | 14.925 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 52.148 | 27.656 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 820 | 2160 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1945 | 3365 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3528 | 3325 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 820 | 2160 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1945 | 3365 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3528 | 3325 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
AMD Radeon E6760 | NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | TeraScale 2 | Fermi |
Nom de code | Turks | GF106 |
Date de sortie | 2 May 2011 | 13 September 2010 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $239.99 | $129 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1134 | 1135 |
Prix maintenant | $239.99 | $64.99 |
Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 5.07 | 26.46 |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse du noyau | 600 MHz | 1566 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 576.0 gflops | 601.3 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 40 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 480 | 192 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 14.4 GTexel / s | 25.1 billion / sec |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt | 106 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 716 million | 1,170 million |
Noyaux CUDA | 192 | |
Température maximale du GPU | 100 °C | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Soutien de bus | PCI-E 2.0 x 16 | |
Hauteur | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | |
Longeur | 8.25" (210 mm) (21 cm) | |
Options SLI | 2-way | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 6-pin | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 11.0 | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.3 | 4.2 |
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 1 GB | 1 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 51.2 GB / s | 57.7 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 3200 MHz | 1804 (3608 data rate) MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Contribution d’audio pour HDMI | Internal | |
Connecteurs d’écran | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI, Mini HDMITwo Dual Link DVI | |
HDMI | ||
Résolution VGA maximale | 2048x1536 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision | ||
CUDA | ||
DSR | ||
SLI |