AMD Radeon Pro 450 versus NVIDIA Quadro K5000M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon Pro 450 and NVIDIA Quadro K5000M 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).
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon Pro 450
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 4 ans 2 mois plus tard
- Environ 33% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 800 MHz versus 601 MHz
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 28 nm
- 2.9x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 35 Watt versus 100 Watt
- Environ 69% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 5080 MHz versus 3000 MHz
- Environ 71% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 619 versus 361
- Environ 78% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 9114 versus 5107
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 26.707 versus 24.713
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.409 versus 2.189
- Environ 38% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 39.784 versus 28.929
- Environ 84% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 126.562 versus 68.712
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 30 October 2016 versus 7 August 2012 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 800 MHz versus 601 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt versus 100 Watt |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5080 MHz versus 3000 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 619 versus 361 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 9114 versus 5107 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 26.707 versus 24.713 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.409 versus 2.189 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 39.784 versus 28.929 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 126.562 versus 68.712 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro K5000M
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 67.31 GTexel / s versus 32 GTexel / s
- 2.1x plus de pipelines: 1344 versus 640
- Environ 58% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,615 gflops versus 1,024 gflops
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 4 GB versus 2 GB
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 2806 versus 2723
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 685.1 versus 568.609
- Environ 44% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4825 versus 3347
- 2.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3712 versus 1749
- Environ 44% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4825 versus 3347
- 2.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3712 versus 1749
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 67.31 GTexel / s versus 32 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1344 versus 640 |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,615 gflops versus 1,024 gflops |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 4 GB versus 2 GB |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2806 versus 2723 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 685.1 versus 568.609 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4825 versus 3347 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3712 versus 1749 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 versus 3344 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4825 versus 3347 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3712 versus 1749 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 versus 3344 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro 450
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K5000M
| 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 Pro 450 | NVIDIA Quadro K5000M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2723 | 2806 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 619 | 361 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 9114 | 5107 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 26.707 | 24.713 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 568.609 | 685.1 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.409 | 2.189 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 39.784 | 28.929 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 126.562 | 68.712 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3347 | 4825 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1749 | 3712 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3344 | 3353 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3347 | 4825 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1749 | 3712 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3344 | 3353 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon Pro 450 | NVIDIA Quadro K5000M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Kepler |
| Nom de code | Baffin | GK104 |
| Date de sortie | 30 October 2016 | 7 August 2012 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 786 | 788 |
| Genre | Mobile workstation | Mobile workstation |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $329.99 | |
| Prix maintenant | $391 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 8.47 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse du noyau | 800 MHz | 601 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,024 gflops | 1,615 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 640 | 1344 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 32 GTexel / s | 67.31 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 3,000 million | 3,540 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Taille du laptop | large | large |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 81.28 GB / s | 96 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5080 MHz | 3000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
| DisplayPort 1.3 HBR / 1.4 HDR Ready | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| HDMI 2.0 | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon Pro 450 avec des autres
AMDRadeon Pro 450 vs
ATIMobility Radeon X600 SE
AMDRadeon Pro 450 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 6100 + nForce 420
AMDRadeon Pro 450 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 570 Rev. 2
AMDRadeon Pro 450 vs
NVIDIAQuadro K5000M
AMDRadeon Pro 450 vs
NVIDIAQuadro K2200
AMDRadeon Pro 450 vs
NVIDIAQuadro P500
