AMD Radeon Pro 570 versus AMD Radeon R9 280
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon Pro 570 and AMD Radeon R9 280 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 570
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 3 ans 3 mois plus tard
- Environ 18% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1105 MHz versus 933 MHz
- Environ 7% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 112.0 GTexel / s versus 104.5 GTexel / s
- Environ 7% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 3,584 gflops versus 3,344 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 28 nm
- Environ 67% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 120 Watt versus 200 Watt
- Environ 33% plus de taille maximale de mémoire: 4 GB versus 3 GB
- 5.4x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 6800 MHz versus 1250 MHz
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 6337 versus 5562
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 697 versus 665
- Environ 11% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 74.958 versus 67.829
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 6.94 versus 6.495
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 89.457 versus 79.909
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 436.958 versus 365.384
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 5 June 2017 versus 4 March 2014 |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1105 MHz versus 933 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 112.0 GTexel / s versus 104.5 GTexel / s |
| Performance á point flottant | 3,584 gflops versus 3,344 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 120 Watt versus 200 Watt |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 4 GB versus 3 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 6800 MHz versus 1250 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6337 versus 5562 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 697 versus 665 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 74.958 versus 67.829 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.94 versus 6.495 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 89.457 versus 79.909 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 436.958 versus 365.384 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3351 versus 3337 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3351 versus 3337 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 280
- Environ 18% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1266.685 versus 1070.209
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 7957 versus 7664
- Environ 58% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3698 versus 2340
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 7957 versus 7664
- Environ 58% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3698 versus 2340
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1266.685 versus 1070.209 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7957 versus 7664 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3698 versus 2340 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7957 versus 7664 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3698 versus 2340 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro 570
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 280
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D 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) |
|
|
||||
| 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 570 | AMD Radeon R9 280 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6337 | 5562 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 697 | 665 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 30300 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 74.958 | 67.829 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1070.209 | 1266.685 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.94 | 6.495 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 89.457 | 79.909 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 436.958 | 365.384 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7664 | 7957 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2340 | 3698 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3351 | 3337 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7664 | 7957 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2340 | 3698 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3351 | 3337 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2009 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon Pro 570 | AMD Radeon R9 280 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Nom de code | Polaris 20 | Tahiti |
| Date de sortie | 5 June 2017 | 4 March 2014 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 421 | 423 |
| Genre | Workstation | Desktop |
| Conception | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $279 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1105 MHz | 933 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1000 MHz | |
| Performance á point flottant | 3,584 gflops | 3,344 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 1792 | 1792 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 112.0 GTexel / s | 104.5 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 120 Watt | 200 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 5,700 million | 4,313 million |
| Stream Processors | 1792 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 241 mm | 275 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin |
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 3 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 217.6 GB / s | 240 GB/s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 256 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 6800 MHz | 1250 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| DDMA audio | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| HD3D | ||
| LiquidVR | ||
| TressFX | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon Pro 570 avec des autres
AMDRadeon Pro 570 vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 560v
AMDRadeon Pro 570 vs
AMDRadeon R9 280
AMDRadeon Pro 570 vs
AMDRadeon R9 M395 Mac Edition
AMDRadeon Pro 570 vs
AMDFirePro W7170M
AMDRadeon Pro 570 vs
AppleM1 8-core
AMDRadeon Pro 570 vs
AppleM1 7-core
