AMD Radeon Pro 5500M versus NVIDIA Tesla K20m
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon Pro 5500M and NVIDIA Tesla K20m 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon Pro 5500M
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 6 ans 10 mois plus tard
- Environ 42% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1000 MHz versus 706 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 124.8 GTexel/s versus 146.8 GTexel / s
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 7 nm versus 28 nm
- 2.6x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 85 Watt versus 225 Watt
- Environ 60% plus de taille maximale de mémoire: 8 GB versus 5 GB
- 2.3x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 12000 MHz versus 5200 MHz
- Environ 54% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 6832 versus 4432
- 3.2x meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 673 versus 210
- 2.5x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 36518 versus 14510
- Environ 93% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 105.82 versus 54.89
- Environ 31% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1860.146 versus 1414.755
- 2.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 11.238 versus 5.303
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 94.947 versus 83.807
- 2.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 596.819 versus 250.291
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 9175 versus 8319
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 9175 versus 8319
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 13 Nov 2019 versus 5 January 2013 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1000 MHz versus 706 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 124.8 GTexel/s versus 146.8 GTexel / s |
| Processus de fabrication | 7 nm versus 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 85 Watt versus 225 Watt |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 8 GB versus 5 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 12000 MHz versus 5200 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6832 versus 4432 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 673 versus 210 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 36518 versus 14510 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 105.82 versus 54.89 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1860.146 versus 1414.755 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 11.238 versus 5.303 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 94.947 versus 83.807 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 596.819 versus 250.291 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9175 versus 8319 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9175 versus 8319 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Tesla K20m
- Environ 63% de pipelines plus haut: 2496 versus 1536
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 7337 versus 3670
- 3.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 10873 versus 3353
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 7337 versus 3670
- 3.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 10873 versus 3353
| Caractéristiques | |
| Pipelines | 2496 versus 1536 |
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 7337 versus 3670 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 10873 versus 3353 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 7337 versus 3670 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 10873 versus 3353 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro 5500M
GPU 2: NVIDIA Tesla K20m
| 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 5500M | NVIDIA Tesla K20m |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6832 | 4432 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 673 | 210 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 36518 | 14510 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 105.82 | 54.89 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1860.146 | 1414.755 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 11.238 | 5.303 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 94.947 | 83.807 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 596.819 | 250.291 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9175 | 8319 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3670 | 7337 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 | 10873 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9175 | 8319 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3670 | 7337 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 | 10873 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3426 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon Pro 5500M | NVIDIA Tesla K20m | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | RDNA 1.0 | Kepler |
| Nom de code | Navi 14 | GK110 |
| Date de sortie | 13 Nov 2019 | 5 January 2013 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 365 | 408 |
| Genre | Laptop | Workstation |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $3,199 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1300 MHz | |
| Unités de Compute | 24 | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1000 MHz | 706 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 7 nm | 28 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 249.6 GFLOPS (1:16) | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 7.987 TFLOPS (2:1) | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 3.994 TFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 1536 | 2496 |
| Pixel fill rate | 41.60 GPixel/s | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 124.8 GTexel/s | 146.8 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 85 Watt | 225 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 6400 million | 7,080 million |
| Performance á point flottant | 3,524 gflops | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
| Longeur | 267 mm | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 8 GB | 5 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 192 GB/s | 208.0 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | 320 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 12000 MHz | 5200 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon Pro 5500M avec des autres
AMDRadeon Pro 5500M vs
ATIFireGL V8600
AMDRadeon Pro 5500M vs
AMDFirePro S9050
AMDRadeon Pro 5500M vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1060 3 GB
AMDRadeon Pro 5500M vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q
AMDRadeon Pro 5500M vs
NVIDIAQuadro T2000 Mobile
AMDRadeon Pro 5500M vs
NVIDIAQuadro T1000 Max-Q
