AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM versus NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM and NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M 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 R5 240 OEM
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 0 mois plus tard
- Environ 4% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 780 MHz versus 753 MHz
- 2.2x plus de pipelines: 320 versus 144
- Environ 28% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 499.2 gflops versus 388.8 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 28 nm versus 40 nm
- Environ 74% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 193 versus 111
- Environ 72% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 4947 versus 2876
- Environ 76% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 13.569 versus 7.699
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.009 versus 0.727
- Environ 56% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 19.668 versus 12.581
- 3.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 77.819 versus 21.909
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 1 November 2013 versus 27 October 2011 |
Vitesse augmenté | 780 MHz versus 753 MHz |
Pipelines | 320 versus 144 |
Performance á point flottant | 499.2 gflops versus 388.8 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm versus 40 nm |
Référence | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 193 versus 111 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 4947 versus 2876 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 13.569 versus 7.699 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.009 versus 0.727 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 19.668 versus 12.581 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 77.819 versus 21.909 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M
- Environ 43% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 35 Watt versus 50 Watt
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 654 versus 545
- Environ 55% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 252.895 versus 162.886
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1134 versus 1119
- Environ 76% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2265 versus 1284
- Environ 25% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2827 versus 2264
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1134 versus 1119
- Environ 76% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2265 versus 1284
- Environ 25% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2827 versus 2264
Caractéristiques | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt versus 50 Watt |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 654 versus 545 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 252.895 versus 162.886 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1134 versus 1119 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2265 versus 1284 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2827 versus 2264 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1134 versus 1119 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2265 versus 1284 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2827 versus 2264 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M
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 R5 240 OEM | NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 545 | 654 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 193 | 111 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 4947 | 2876 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 13.569 | 7.699 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 162.886 | 252.895 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.009 | 0.727 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 19.668 | 12.581 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 77.819 | 21.909 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1119 | 1134 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1284 | 2265 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2264 | 2827 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1119 | 1134 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1284 | 2265 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2264 | 2827 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM | NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Fermi |
Nom de code | Oland | GF106 |
Date de sortie | 1 November 2013 | 27 October 2011 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1414 | 1417 |
Genre | Desktop | Laptop |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 780 MHz | 753 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 730 MHz | |
Performance á point flottant | 499.2 gflops | 388.8 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 320 | 144 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 15.6 GTexel / s | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 35 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 1,040 million | 1,170 million |
Noyaux CUDA | Up to 144 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Longeur | 168 mm | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Soutien de bus | PCI Express 2.0 | |
Taille du laptop | large | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12 API |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 2 GB | 2 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 28.8 GB / s | |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1800 MHz | |
Genre de mémoire | DDR3 | DDR3\DDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Blu-Ray | ||
3D Gaming | ||
3D Vision | ||
CUDA | ||
DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
Optimus | ||
SLI |