AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 versus NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 (Desktop)
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 (Desktop) 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 WX 3200
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 0 mois plus tard
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 4 GB versus 2 GB
- Environ 44% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 14219 versus 9864
- 2.9x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 486.804 versus 170.785
- Environ 82% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.503 versus 1.373
- 2.8x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 53.111 versus 18.937
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3352 versus 3331
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3352 versus 3331
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 27 May 2019 versus 17 May 2017 |
Taille de mémore maximale | 4 GB versus 2 GB |
Référence | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 14219 versus 9864 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 486.804 versus 170.785 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.503 versus 1.373 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 53.111 versus 18.937 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3352 versus 3331 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3352 versus 3331 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 (Desktop)
- Environ 33% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1228 MHz versus 925 MHz
- Environ 54% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1670 MHz versus 1082 MHz
- 2.2x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 30 Watt versus 65 Watt
- Environ 50% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 6000 MHz versus 4000 MHz
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 2433 versus 2398
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 442 versus 411
- Environ 42% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 36.898 versus 25.896
- Environ 60% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 160.823 versus 100.658
- Environ 44% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3629 versus 2524
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3684 versus 3274
- Environ 44% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3629 versus 2524
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3684 versus 3274
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 1228 MHz versus 925 MHz |
Vitesse augmenté | 1670 MHz versus 1082 MHz |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt versus 65 Watt |
Vitesse de mémoire | 6000 MHz versus 4000 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2433 versus 2398 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 442 versus 411 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 36.898 versus 25.896 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 160.823 versus 100.658 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3629 versus 2524 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3684 versus 3274 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3629 versus 2524 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3684 versus 3274 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 (Desktop)
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 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 (Desktop) |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2398 | 2433 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 411 | 442 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 14219 | 9864 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 25.896 | 36.898 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 486.804 | 170.785 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.503 | 1.373 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 53.111 | 18.937 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 100.658 | 160.823 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2524 | 3629 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3274 | 3684 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3352 | 3331 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2524 | 3629 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3274 | 3684 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3352 | 3331 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 35 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 (Desktop) | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Polaris | Pascal |
Nom de code | Lexa | N17P-G1 |
Date de sortie | 27 May 2019 | 17 May 2017 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $199 | $69.99 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 841 | 874 |
Genre | Workstation | Desktop |
Prix maintenant | $59.99 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 63.91 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1082 MHz | 1670 MHz |
Unités de Compute | 10 | |
Vitesse du noyau | 925 MHz | 1228 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 | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt | 30 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 2200 million | |
Pipelines | 384 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | 4x mini-DisplayPort | |
Soutien de G-SYNC | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Hauteur | Half Height | |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | |
Longeur | 6.6" (168 mm) | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 | 12_1 |
OpenCL | 2.0 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | |
Shader Model | 6.4 | |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 4 GB | 2 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 96 GB/s | |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | 64 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 4000 MHz | 6000 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
Multi Monitor | ||
Multi-Projection | ||
VR Ready |