AMD Radeon R7 240 versus AMD Radeon HD 7790
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R7 240 and AMD Radeon HD 7790 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 R7 240
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 6 mois plus tard
- Environ 70% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 50 Watt versus 85 Watt
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 2 GB versus 1 GB
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2342 versus 988
- Environ 63% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3353 versus 2061
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2342 versus 988
- Environ 63% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3353 versus 2061
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 8 October 2013 versus 22 March 2013 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt versus 85 Watt |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 2 GB versus 1 GB |
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2342 versus 988 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 versus 2061 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2342 versus 988 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 versus 2061 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon HD 7790
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 56 GTexel / s versus 15.6 GTexel / s
- 2.8x plus de pipelines: 896 versus 320
- 3.6x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,792 gflops versus 499.2 gflops
- 5.2x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 6000 MHz versus 1150 MHz
- 3.4x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3090 versus 902
- Environ 68% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 459 versus 274
- 2.8x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 14832 versus 5331
- 3.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 40.763 versus 13.344
- 2.8x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 828.247 versus 290.632
- 2.9x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.646 versus 1.262
- 2.9x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 63.284 versus 21.59
- 3.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 217.744 versus 60.326
- 3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5087 versus 1688
- 3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5087 versus 1688
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 56 GTexel / s versus 15.6 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 896 versus 320 |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,792 gflops versus 499.2 gflops |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 6000 MHz versus 1150 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3090 versus 902 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 459 versus 274 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 14832 versus 5331 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 40.763 versus 13.344 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 828.247 versus 290.632 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.646 versus 1.262 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 63.284 versus 21.59 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 217.744 versus 60.326 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5087 versus 1688 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5087 versus 1688 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 240
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 7790
| 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 R7 240 | AMD Radeon HD 7790 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 902 | 3090 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 274 | 459 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5331 | 14832 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 13.344 | 40.763 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 290.632 | 828.247 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.262 | 3.646 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 21.59 | 63.284 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 60.326 | 217.744 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1688 | 5087 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2342 | 988 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 | 2061 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1688 | 5087 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2342 | 988 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 | 2061 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon R7 240 | AMD Radeon HD 7790 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | GCN 2.0 |
| Nom de code | Oland | Bonaire |
| Conception | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series | AMD Radeon HD 7000 Series |
| Date de sortie | 8 October 2013 | 22 March 2013 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $69 | $149 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1236 | 820 |
| Prix maintenant | $49.99 | $134.99 |
| Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 24.92 | 29.57 |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 780 MHz | |
| Performance á point flottant | 499.2 gflops | 1,792 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 320 | 896 |
| Stream Processors | 320 | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 15.6 GTexel / s | 56 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 85 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,040 million | 2,080 million |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1000 MHz | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 168 mm | 183 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | N / A | 1x 6-pin |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (12_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 1 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 72 GB/s | 96 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1150 MHz | 6000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | DDR3 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
| CrossFire | ||
| DDMA audio | ||
| FreeSync | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon R7 240 avec des autres
AMDRadeon R7 240 vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 4250 IGP
AMDRadeon R7 240 vs
AMDRadeon HD 6370M
AMDRadeon R7 240 vs
AMDRadeon HD 6550D
AMDRadeon R7 240 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 840M
AMDRadeon R7 240 vs
IntelUHD Graphics 630
AMDRadeon R7 240 vs
IntelUHD Graphics 617
