AMD Radeon R7 240 versus NVIDIA GeForce GT 420 OEM
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R7 240 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 420 OEM 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 3 ans 1 mois plus tard
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 15.6 GTexel / s versus 2.8 GTexel / s
- 6.7x plus de pipelines: 320 versus 48
- 3.7x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 499.2 gflops versus 134.4 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 28 nm versus 40 nm
- Environ 95% plus de taille maximale de mémoire: 2 GB versus 1048 MB
- 2.1x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 902 versus 426
- Environ 45% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 274 versus 189
- 4.6x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 5331 versus 1161
- 4.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 13.344 versus 3.121
- 2.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 290.632 versus 109.787
- 4.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 21.59 versus 5.005
- 7.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 60.326 versus 8.55
- 2.6x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1688 versus 660
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2342 versus 1158
- 2.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3353 versus 1626
- 2.6x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1688 versus 660
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2342 versus 1158
- 2.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3353 versus 1626
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 8 October 2013 versus 3 September 2010 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 15.6 GTexel / s versus 2.8 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 320 versus 48 |
| Performance á point flottant | 499.2 gflops versus 134.4 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm versus 40 nm |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 2 GB versus 1048 MB |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 902 versus 426 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 274 versus 189 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5331 versus 1161 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 13.344 versus 3.121 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 290.632 versus 109.787 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 21.59 versus 5.005 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 60.326 versus 8.55 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1688 versus 660 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2342 versus 1158 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 versus 1626 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1688 versus 660 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2342 versus 1158 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 versus 1626 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GT 420 OEM
- Environ 57% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 1800 MHz versus 1150 MHz
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1800 MHz versus 1150 MHz |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 240
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 420 OEM
| 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 - 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 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 420 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 902 | 426 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 274 | 189 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5331 | 1161 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 13.344 | 3.121 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 290.632 | 109.787 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.262 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 21.59 | 5.005 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 60.326 | 8.55 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1688 | 660 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2342 | 1158 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 | 1626 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1688 | 660 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2342 | 1158 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 | 1626 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon R7 240 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 420 OEM | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Fermi |
| Nom de code | Oland | GF108 |
| Conception | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series | |
| Date de sortie | 8 October 2013 | 3 September 2010 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $69 | |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1236 | 1526 |
| Prix maintenant | $49.99 | |
| Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 24.92 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 780 MHz | |
| Performance á point flottant | 499.2 gflops | 134.4 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 320 | 48 |
| Stream Processors | 320 | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 15.6 GTexel / s | 2.8 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,040 million | 585 million |
| Vitesse du noyau | 700 MHz | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
| 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 2.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 168 mm | 145 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | N / A | None |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 1048 MB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 72 GB/s | 28.8 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1150 MHz | 1800 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | DDR3 | DDR3 |
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
