AMD Radeon HD 8550G versus NVIDIA GeForce GT 630M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon HD 8550G and NVIDIA GeForce GT 630M 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: Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon HD 8550G
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 11 mois plus tard
- 2.7x plus de pipelines: 256 versus 96
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 32 nm versus 40 nm
Date de sortie | 12 March 2013 versus 22 March 2012 |
Pipelines | 256 versus 96 |
Processus de fabrication | 32 nm versus 40 nm |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GT 630M
- Environ 95% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 2401 versus 1234
- Environ 28% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 967 versus 753
- Environ 28% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 967 versus 753
- Environ 98% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2766 versus 1397
- Environ 98% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2766 versus 1397
- Environ 37% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3359 versus 2459
- Environ 37% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3359 versus 2459
- Environ 27% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 150 versus 118
- Environ 31% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 538 versus 412
Référence | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 2401 versus 1234 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 967 versus 753 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 967 versus 753 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2766 versus 1397 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2766 versus 1397 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3359 versus 2459 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3359 versus 2459 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 150 versus 118 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 538 versus 412 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon HD 8550G
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 630M
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
Nom | AMD Radeon HD 8550G | NVIDIA GeForce GT 630M |
---|---|---|
Geekbench - OpenCL | 1234 | 2401 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 753 | 967 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 753 | 967 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1397 | 2766 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1397 | 2766 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2459 | 3359 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2459 | 3359 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 118 | 150 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 412 | 538 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 5.055 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 215.004 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.635 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 10.393 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 19.903 | |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
AMD Radeon HD 8550G | NVIDIA GeForce GT 630M | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Terascale 3 | Fermi |
Nom de code | Richland | GF108 |
Date de sortie | 12 March 2013 | 22 March 2012 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1400 | 1403 |
Genre | Laptop | Laptop |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 720 MHz | |
Vitesse du noyau | 515 MHz | |
Processus de fabrication | 32 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 256 | 96 |
Noyaux CUDA | 96 | |
Performance á point flottant | 253.4 gflops | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 33 Watt | |
Compte de transistor | 585 million | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Taille du laptop | medium sized | medium sized |
Soutien de bus | PCI Express 2.0 | |
Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 11 | 12.0 (11_0) |
DirectX 11.2 | 12 API | |
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
OpenGL | 4.5 | |
Mémoire |
||
Mémoire partagé | 1 | 0 |
RAM maximale | 1 GB | |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1800 MHz | |
Genre de mémoire | DDR3\GDDR5 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | |
HDCP | ||
HDMI | ||
Résolution VGA maximale | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Blu-Ray | ||
3D Vision | ||
3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
CUDA | ||
DirectCompute | ||
DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
Optimus |