AMD Radeon HD 8490 OEM versus AMD Radeon HD 8570 OEM
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon HD 8490 OEM and AMD Radeon HD 8570 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. 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 HD 8490 OEM
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 6 mois plus tard
- Environ 20% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 875 MHz versus 730 MHz
- Environ 43% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 35 Watt versus 50 Watt
| Date de sortie | 23 July 2013 versus 8 January 2013 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 875 MHz versus 730 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt versus 50 Watt |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon HD 8570 OEM
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 18.72 GTexel / s versus 7 GTexel / s
- 2.4x plus de pipelines: 384 versus 160
- 2.1x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 599.0 gflops versus 280.0 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 28 nm versus 40 nm
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 2 GB versus 1 GB
- 3.6x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 939 versus 263
- Environ 63% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 284 versus 174
- 6.7x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 5799 versus 872
- 7.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 14.771 versus 2.021
- 2.7x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 285.896 versus 104.327
- 5.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.219 versus 0.239
- 4.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 24.949 versus 5.628
- 3.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 72.899 versus 23.365
- 2.6x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1759 versus 672
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2540 versus 1078
- Environ 60% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3355 versus 2093
- 2.6x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1759 versus 672
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2540 versus 1078
- Environ 60% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3355 versus 2093
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 18.72 GTexel / s versus 7 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 384 versus 160 |
| Performance á point flottant | 599.0 gflops versus 280.0 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm versus 40 nm |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 2 GB versus 1 GB |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 939 versus 263 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 284 versus 174 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5799 versus 872 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 14.771 versus 2.021 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 285.896 versus 104.327 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.219 versus 0.239 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 24.949 versus 5.628 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 72.899 versus 23.365 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1759 versus 672 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2540 versus 1078 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 versus 2093 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1759 versus 672 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2540 versus 1078 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 versus 2093 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon HD 8490 OEM
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 8570 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 Radeon HD 8490 OEM | AMD Radeon HD 8570 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 263 | 939 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 174 | 284 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 872 | 5799 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 2.021 | 14.771 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 104.327 | 285.896 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.239 | 1.219 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 5.628 | 24.949 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 23.365 | 72.899 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 672 | 1759 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1078 | 2540 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2093 | 3355 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 672 | 1759 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1078 | 2540 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2093 | 3355 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon HD 8490 OEM | AMD Radeon HD 8570 OEM | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 | GCN 1.0 |
| Nom de code | Caicos | Oland |
| Date de sortie | 23 July 2013 | 8 January 2013 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1541 | 1142 |
| Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse du noyau | 875 MHz | 730 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 280.0 gflops | 599.0 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 160 | 384 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 7 GTexel / s | 18.72 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 370 million | 1,040 million |
| Vitesse augmenté | 780 MHz | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Longeur | 168 mm | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 14.4 GB / s | 28.8 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1800 MHz | 1800 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | DDR3 | GDDR3 |

