AMD Radeon Pro W5500 versus AMD Radeon R9 280
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon Pro W5500 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: 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), PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon Pro W5500
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 5 ans 11 mois plus tard
- Environ 50% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1400 MHz versus 933 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 123.2 GTexel/s versus 104.5 GTexel / s
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 7 nm versus 28 nm
- Environ 60% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 125 Watt versus 200 Watt
- 2.7x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 8 GB versus 3 GB
- Environ 40% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 1750 MHz (14000 MHz effective) versus 1250 MHz
- Environ 93% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 130.7 versus 67.829
- Environ 86% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 2361.73 versus 1266.685
- 2.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 13.641 versus 6.495
- Environ 70% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 135.462 versus 79.909
- 2.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 774.974 versus 365.384
- Environ 53% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 12184 versus 7957
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3355 versus 3337
- Environ 53% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 12184 versus 7957
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3355 versus 3337
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 10 Feb 2020 versus 4 March 2014 |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1400 MHz versus 933 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 123.2 GTexel/s versus 104.5 GTexel / s |
| Processus de fabrication | 7 nm versus 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 125 Watt versus 200 Watt |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 8 GB versus 3 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1750 MHz (14000 MHz effective) versus 1250 MHz |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 130.7 versus 67.829 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2361.73 versus 1266.685 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 13.641 versus 6.495 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 135.462 versus 79.909 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 774.974 versus 365.384 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12184 versus 7957 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 versus 3337 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12184 versus 7957 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 versus 3337 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 280
- Environ 27% de pipelines plus haut: 1792 versus 1408
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3698 versus 3463
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3698 versus 3463
| Caractéristiques | |
| Pipelines | 1792 versus 1408 |
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3698 versus 3463 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3698 versus 3463 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro W5500
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 280
| 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 W5500 | AMD Radeon R9 280 |
|---|---|---|
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 130.7 | 67.829 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2361.73 | 1266.685 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 13.641 | 6.495 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 135.462 | 79.909 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 774.974 | 365.384 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12184 | 7957 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3463 | 3698 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 | 3337 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12184 | 7957 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3463 | 3698 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 | 3337 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 5562 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 665 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2009 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon Pro W5500 | AMD Radeon R9 280 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | RDNA 1.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Nom de code | Navi 14 | Tahiti |
| Date de sortie | 10 Feb 2020 | 4 March 2014 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $399 | $279 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 330 | 423 |
| Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
| Conception | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1400 MHz | 933 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1187 MHz | |
| Processus de fabrication | 7 nm | 28 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 246.4 GFLOPS (1:16) | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 7.885 TFLOPS (2:1) | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 3.942 TFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 1408 | 1792 |
| Pixel fill rate | 44.80 GPixel/s | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 123.2 GTexel/s | 104.5 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 125 Watt | 200 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 6400 million | 4,313 million |
| Performance á point flottant | 3,344 gflops | |
| Stream Processors | 1792 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 4x DisplayPort | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | 275 mm |
| Énergie du systeme recommandé (PSU) | 350 Watt | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 6-pin | 1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin |
| Largeur | Single-slot | |
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 8 GB | 3 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 224 GB/s | 240 GB/s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | 384 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1750 MHz (14000 MHz effective) | 1250 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | 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 W5500 avec des autres
AMDRadeon Pro W5500 vs
ATIRadeon X1950 CrossFire Edition
AMDRadeon Pro W5500 vs
AMDRadeon RX 580
AMDRadeon Pro W5500 vs
AMDRadeon RX Vega M GH
AMDRadeon Pro W5500 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q
AMDRadeon Pro W5500 vs
NVIDIAT550 Mobile
AMDRadeon Pro W5500 vs
NVIDIACMP 30HX
