AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 versus AMD Radeon E9260 PCIe
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 and AMD Radeon E9260 PCIe 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 2 ans 8 mois plus tard
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 34.62 GTexel/s versus 57.6 GTexel / s
- Environ 23% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 65 Watt versus 80 Watt
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3274 versus 2344
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3274 versus 2344
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 27 May 2019 versus 27 September 2016 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 34.62 GTexel/s versus 57.6 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt versus 80 Watt |
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3274 versus 2344 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3274 versus 2344 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon E9260 PCIe
- Environ 18% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1090 MHz versus 925 MHz
- Environ 11% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1200 MHz versus 1082 MHz
- Environ 75% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 7000 MHz versus 4000 MHz
- Environ 71% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 44.281 versus 25.896
- Environ 61% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 785.276 versus 486.804
- Environ 58% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.951 versus 2.503
- Environ 24% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 65.944 versus 53.111
- Environ 95% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 196.307 versus 100.658
- 2.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5269 versus 2524
- 2.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5269 versus 2524
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1090 MHz versus 925 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1200 MHz versus 1082 MHz |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 7000 MHz versus 4000 MHz |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 44.281 versus 25.896 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 785.276 versus 486.804 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.951 versus 2.503 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 65.944 versus 53.111 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 196.307 versus 100.658 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5269 versus 2524 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 versus 3352 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5269 versus 2524 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 versus 3352 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200
GPU 2: AMD Radeon E9260 PCIe
| 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 Radeon E9260 PCIe |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2415 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 415 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 14042 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 25.896 | 44.281 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 486.804 | 785.276 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.503 | 3.951 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 53.111 | 65.944 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 100.658 | 196.307 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2524 | 5269 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3274 | 2344 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3352 | 3357 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2524 | 5269 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3274 | 2344 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3352 | 3357 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 | AMD Radeon E9260 PCIe | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Polaris | GCN 4.0 |
| Nom de code | Lexa | Baffin |
| Date de sortie | 27 May 2019 | 27 September 2016 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $199 | |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 849 | 850 |
| Genre | Workstation | Desktop |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1082 MHz | 1200 MHz |
| Unités de Compute | 10 | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 925 MHz | 1090 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 14 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 | 57.6 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt | 80 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 2200 million | 3,000 million |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,150 gflops | |
| Pipelines | 896 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 4x mini-DisplayPort | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Hauteur | Half Height | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Longeur | 6.6" (168 mm) | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12.0 (12_0) |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 96 GB/s | 112.0 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4000 MHz | 7000 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 X600
AMDRadeon Pro WX 3200 vs
ATIRadeon X300
AMDRadeon Pro WX 3200 vs
NVIDIAGeForce Go 6800
AMDRadeon Pro WX 3200 vs
AMDRadeon HD 8650D IGP
AMDRadeon Pro WX 3200 vs
NVIDIAQuadro M1000M
AMDRadeon Pro WX 3200 vs
AMDRadeon E9260 PCIe
