AMD Radeon Pro 5500M versus NVIDIA Tesla T4
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon Pro 5500M and NVIDIA Tesla T4 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 1 ans 2 mois plus tard
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 7 nm versus 12 nm
- Environ 20% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 12000 MHz versus 10000 MHz
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 673 versus 596
- Environ 86% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3670 versus 1976
- Environ 88% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3353 versus 1781
- Environ 86% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3670 versus 1976
- Environ 88% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3353 versus 1781
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 13 Nov 2019 versus 13 September 2018 |
| Processus de fabrication | 7 nm versus 12 nm |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 12000 MHz versus 10000 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 673 versus 596 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3670 versus 1976 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 versus 1781 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3670 versus 1976 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 versus 1781 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Tesla T4
- Environ 1% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1005 MHz versus 1000 MHz
- Environ 17% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1515 MHz versus 1300 MHz
- Environ 13% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 75 Watt versus 85 Watt
- Environ 60% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 10909 versus 6832
- Environ 68% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 61276 versus 36509
- Environ 21% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 127.622 versus 105.82
- Environ 63% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 3026.812 versus 1860.146
- Environ 67% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 18.798 versus 11.238
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 119.936 versus 94.947
- Environ 53% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 910.721 versus 596.819
- Environ 53% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 14076 versus 9175
- Environ 53% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 14076 versus 9175
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1005 MHz versus 1000 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1515 MHz versus 1300 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt versus 85 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 10909 versus 6832 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 61276 versus 36509 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 127.622 versus 105.82 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3026.812 versus 1860.146 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 18.798 versus 11.238 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 119.936 versus 94.947 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 910.721 versus 596.819 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 14076 versus 9175 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 14076 versus 9175 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro 5500M
GPU 2: NVIDIA Tesla T4
| 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 T4 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6832 | 10909 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 673 | 596 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 36509 | 61276 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 105.82 | 127.622 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1860.146 | 3026.812 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 11.238 | 18.798 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 94.947 | 119.936 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 596.819 | 910.721 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9175 | 14076 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3670 | 1976 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 | 1781 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9175 | 14076 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3670 | 1976 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 | 1781 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3426 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon Pro 5500M | NVIDIA Tesla T4 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | RDNA 1.0 | Turing |
| Nom de code | Navi 14 | TU104 |
| Date de sortie | 13 Nov 2019 | 13 September 2018 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 365 | 263 |
| Genre | Laptop | Workstation |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1300 MHz | 1515 MHz |
| Unités de Compute | 24 | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1000 MHz | 1005 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 7 nm | 12 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 | |
| Pixel fill rate | 41.60 GPixel/s | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 124.8 GTexel/s | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 85 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 6400 million | 13,600 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 8 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 192 GB/s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 12000 MHz | 10000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | |
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
