AMD Radeon E8860 versus NVIDIA Quadro K3000M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon E8860 and NVIDIA Quadro K3000M pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire. 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 Radeon E8860
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 7 mois plus tard
- Environ 11% de pipelines plus haut: 640 versus 576
- Environ 6% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 800.0 gflops versus 753.4 gflops
- 2x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 37 Watt versus 75 Watt
- Environ 61% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 4500 MHz versus 2800 MHz
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1686 versus 1641
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 436 versus 337
- 6.2x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 26300 versus 4211
- Environ 41% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 20.395 versus 14.45
- Environ 31% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 529.248 versus 403.983
- Environ 70% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.683 versus 0.992
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 15.803 versus 15.202
- Environ 97% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 47.86 versus 24.266
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 4345 versus 3353
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 4345 versus 3353
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 25 January 2014 versus 1 June 2012 |
Pipelines | 640 versus 576 |
Performance á point flottant | 800.0 gflops versus 753.4 gflops |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 37 Watt versus 75 Watt |
Vitesse de mémoire | 4500 MHz versus 2800 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1686 versus 1641 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 436 versus 337 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 26300 versus 4211 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 20.395 versus 14.45 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 529.248 versus 403.983 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.683 versus 0.992 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 15.803 versus 15.202 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 47.86 versus 24.266 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 4345 versus 3353 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 4345 versus 3353 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro K3000M
- Environ 14% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 654 MHz versus 575 MHz
- Environ 26% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 31.39 GTexel / s versus 25 GTexel / s
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2527 versus 1246
- 2.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3505 versus 1655
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2527 versus 1246
- 2.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3505 versus 1655
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 654 MHz versus 575 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 31.39 GTexel / s versus 25 GTexel / s |
Référence | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2527 versus 1246 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3505 versus 1655 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2527 versus 1246 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3505 versus 1655 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon E8860
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K3000M
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 E8860 | NVIDIA Quadro K3000M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1686 | 1641 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 436 | 337 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 26300 | 4211 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 20.395 | 14.45 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 529.248 | 403.983 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.683 | 0.992 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 15.803 | 15.202 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 47.86 | 24.266 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1246 | 2527 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1655 | 3505 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 4345 | 3353 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1246 | 2527 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1655 | 3505 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 4345 | 3353 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
AMD Radeon E8860 | NVIDIA Quadro K3000M | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |
Nom de code | Venus | GK104 |
Date de sortie | 25 January 2014 | 1 June 2012 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1028 | 1031 |
Genre | Desktop | Mobile workstation |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $155 | |
Prix maintenant | $155 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 13.57 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 625 MHz | |
Vitesse du noyau | 575 MHz | 654 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 800.0 gflops | 753.4 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 640 | 576 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 25 GTexel / s | 31.39 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 37 Watt | 75 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 1,500 million | 3,540 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | 4x mini-DisplayPort | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
Taille du laptop | large | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 2 GB | 2 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 72 GB / s | 89.6 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 4500 MHz | 2800 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 |