AMD Radeon Pro 560X versus AMD Radeon HD 8970M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon Pro 560X and AMD Radeon HD 8970M 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon Pro 560X
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 5 ans 2 mois plus tard
- Environ 18% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1004 MHz versus 850 MHz
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 28 nm
- Environ 33% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 75 Watt versus 100 Watt
- Environ 6% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 5080 MHz versus 4800 MHz
- 2.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5367 versus 2521
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3351 versus 2595
- 2.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5367 versus 2521
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3351 versus 2595
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 16 July 2018 versus 14 May 2013 |
Vitesse du noyau | 1004 MHz versus 850 MHz |
Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt versus 100 Watt |
Vitesse de mémoire | 5080 MHz versus 4800 MHz |
Référence | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5367 versus 2521 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3351 versus 2595 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5367 versus 2521 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3351 versus 2595 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon HD 8970M
- Environ 25% de pipelines plus haut: 1280 versus 1024
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3876 versus 3678
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 807 versus 711
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 20899 versus 17548
- Environ 18% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 57.241 versus 48.494
- Environ 80% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1223.742 versus 679.583
- Environ 46% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.78 versus 3.96
- Environ 43% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 89.306 versus 62.405
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 268.643 versus 247.728
- Environ 48% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3688 versus 2495
- Environ 48% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3688 versus 2495
Caractéristiques | |
Pipelines | 1280 versus 1024 |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3876 versus 3678 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 807 versus 711 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 20899 versus 17548 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 57.241 versus 48.494 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1223.742 versus 679.583 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.78 versus 3.96 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 89.306 versus 62.405 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 268.643 versus 247.728 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3688 versus 2495 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3688 versus 2495 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro 560X
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 8970M
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 560X | AMD Radeon HD 8970M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3678 | 3876 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 711 | 807 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 17548 | 20899 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 48.494 | 57.241 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 679.583 | 1223.742 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.96 | 5.78 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 62.405 | 89.306 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 247.728 | 268.643 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5367 | 2521 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2495 | 3688 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3351 | 2595 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5367 | 2521 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2495 | 3688 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3351 | 2595 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
AMD Radeon Pro 560X | AMD Radeon HD 8970M | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | GCN 4.0 | GCN 1.0 |
Nom de code | Polaris 21 | Neptune |
Date de sortie | 16 July 2018 | 14 May 2013 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 552 | 554 |
Genre | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
Conception | AMD Radeon HD 8000M Series | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse du noyau | 1004 MHz | 850 MHz |
Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 1024 | 1280 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 100 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 3,000 million | 2,800 million |
Vitesse augmenté | 850 MHz | |
Unités de Compute | 20 | |
Performance á point flottant | 2,304 gflops | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 72 GTexel / s | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Taille du laptop | large | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 11 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 5080 MHz | 4800 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
RAM maximale | 4 GB | |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 153.6 GB/s | |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
PowerTune | ||
ZeroCore |