AMD Radeon Pro W5500 versus NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon Pro W5500 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 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: 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, Geekbench - OpenCL, 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon Pro W5500
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 4 mois plus tard
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 7 nm versus 12 nm
- Environ 72% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 125 Watt versus 215 Watt
| Date de sortie | 10 Feb 2020 versus 20 September 2018 |
| Processus de fabrication | 7 nm versus 12 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 125 Watt versus 215 Watt |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080
- Environ 28% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1515 MHz versus 1187 MHz
- Environ 22% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1710 MHz versus 1400 MHz
- 2.1x plus de pipelines: 2944 versus 1408
- 8x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 14000 MHz versus 1750 MHz (14000 MHz effective)
- 2.5x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 326.494 versus 130.7
- Environ 67% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 3938.377 versus 2361.73
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 31.684 versus 13.641
- Environ 18% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 159.275 versus 135.462
- Environ 94% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 1506.874 versus 774.974
- 2.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 25500 versus 12184
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 6966 versus 3463
- Environ 88% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 6293 versus 3355
- 2.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 25500 versus 12184
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 6966 versus 3463
- Environ 88% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 6293 versus 3355
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1515 MHz versus 1187 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1710 MHz versus 1400 MHz |
| Pipelines | 2944 versus 1408 |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 14000 MHz versus 1750 MHz (14000 MHz effective) |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 326.494 versus 130.7 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3938.377 versus 2361.73 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 31.684 versus 13.641 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 159.275 versus 135.462 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1506.874 versus 774.974 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 25500 versus 12184 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 6966 versus 3463 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 6293 versus 3355 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 25500 versus 12184 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 6966 versus 3463 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 6293 versus 3355 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro W5500
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080
| 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 | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 |
|---|---|---|
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 130.7 | 326.494 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2361.73 | 3938.377 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 13.641 | 31.684 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 135.462 | 159.275 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 774.974 | 1506.874 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12184 | 25500 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3463 | 6966 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 | 6293 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12184 | 25500 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3463 | 6966 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 | 6293 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 18816 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 912 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 102535 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 10966 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon Pro W5500 | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | RDNA 1.0 | Turing |
| Nom de code | Navi 14 | TU104 |
| Date de sortie | 10 Feb 2020 | 20 September 2018 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $399 | $699 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 330 | 97 |
| Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
| Prix maintenant | $749.99 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 32.34 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1400 MHz | 1710 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1187 MHz | 1515 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 7 nm | 12 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 | 2944 |
| Pixel fill rate | 44.80 GPixel/s | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 123.2 GTexel/s | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 125 Watt | 215 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 6400 million | 13,600 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 4x DisplayPort | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | 267 mm |
| Énergie du systeme recommandé (PSU) | 350 Watt | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 6-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
| Largeur | Single-slot | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 8 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 224 GB/s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | 256 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1750 MHz (14000 MHz effective) | 14000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
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
