AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 versus AMD FirePro V7900
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 and AMD FirePro V7900 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).
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 8 ans 0 mois plus tard
- Environ 28% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 925 MHz versus 725 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 34.62 GTexel/s versus 58.0 GTexel / s
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 40 nm
- 2.3x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 65 Watt versus 151 Watt
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 4 GB versus 2 GB
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 2415 versus 2305
- Environ 24% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 415 versus 336
- Environ 83% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 25.896 versus 14.134
- Environ 91% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.503 versus 1.309
- Environ 45% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 53.111 versus 36.678
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 27 May 2019 versus 24 May 2011 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 925 MHz versus 725 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 34.62 GTexel/s versus 58.0 GTexel / s |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 40 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt versus 151 Watt |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 4 GB versus 2 GB |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2415 versus 2305 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 415 versus 336 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 25.896 versus 14.134 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.503 versus 1.309 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 53.111 versus 36.678 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD FirePro V7900
- Environ 25% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 5000 MHz versus 4000 MHz
- Environ 96% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 27733 versus 14118
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 676.409 versus 486.804
- Environ 70% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 171.25 versus 100.658
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2996 versus 2524
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3710 versus 3274
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2996 versus 2524
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3710 versus 3274
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5000 MHz versus 4000 MHz |
| Référence | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 27733 versus 14118 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 676.409 versus 486.804 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 171.25 versus 100.658 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2996 versus 2524 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3710 versus 3274 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3354 versus 3352 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2996 versus 2524 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3710 versus 3274 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3354 versus 3352 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200
GPU 2: AMD FirePro V7900
| 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 WX 3200 | AMD FirePro V7900 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2415 | 2305 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 415 | 336 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 14118 | 27733 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 25.896 | 14.134 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 486.804 | 676.409 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.503 | 1.309 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 53.111 | 36.678 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 100.658 | 171.25 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2524 | 2996 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3274 | 3710 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3352 | 3354 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2524 | 2996 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3274 | 3710 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3352 | 3354 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 | AMD FirePro V7900 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Polaris | TeraScale 3 |
| Nom de code | Lexa | Cayman |
| Date de sortie | 27 May 2019 | 24 May 2011 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $199 | |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 855 | 852 |
| Genre | Workstation | Workstation |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1082 MHz | |
| Unités de Compute | 10 | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 925 MHz | 725 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 86.56 GFLOPS | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 1,385 GFLOPS | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 1,385 GFLOPS | |
| Pixel fill rate | 17.31 GPixel/s | |
| Stream Processors | 640 | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 34.62 GTexel/s | 58.0 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt | 151 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 2200 million | 2,640 million |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,856.0 gflops | |
| Pipelines | 1280 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 4x mini-DisplayPort | 4x DisplayPort |
| Compte DisplayPort | 4 | |
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| StereoOutput3D | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Hauteur | Half Height | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 6.6" (168 mm) | 279 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 1x 6-pin |
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 2.1 x16 | |
| Facteur de forme | Full Height / Full Length | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 | 11.2 (11_0) |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 2 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 96 GB/s | 160 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | 256 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4000 MHz | 5000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
| Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 avec des autres
AMDRadeon Pro WX 3200 vs
ATIMobility Radeon X1450
AMDRadeon Pro WX 3200 vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 5850
AMDRadeon Pro WX 3200 vs
AMDFirePro V7900
AMDRadeon Pro WX 3200 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 810A
AMDRadeon Pro WX 3200 vs
IntelIris Plus Graphics 650
AMDRadeon Pro WX 3200 vs
AMDRadeon R9 M390
