AMD Radeon R7 250E versus NVIDIA Quadro K3100M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R7 250E and NVIDIA Quadro K3100M 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: 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, PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R7 250E
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 4 mois plus tard
- Environ 13% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 800 MHz versus 706 MHz
- Environ 36% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 55 Watt versus 75 Watt
- Environ 41% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 4500 MHz versus 3200 MHz
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 21.562 versus 19.239
- Environ 37% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 582.073 versus 426.305
- Environ 62% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.2 versus 1.356
- 2.5x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 38.669 versus 15.251
- 2.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 98.052 versus 38.135
- Environ 48% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3698 versus 2502
- Environ 28% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3355 versus 2616
- Environ 48% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3698 versus 2502
- Environ 28% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3355 versus 2616
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 20 December 2013 versus 23 July 2013 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 800 MHz versus 706 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 55 Watt versus 75 Watt |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4500 MHz versus 3200 MHz |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 21.562 versus 19.239 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 582.073 versus 426.305 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.2 versus 1.356 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 38.669 versus 15.251 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 98.052 versus 38.135 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3698 versus 2502 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 versus 2616 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3698 versus 2502 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 versus 2616 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro K3100M
- Environ 76% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 45.18 GTexel / s versus 25.6 GTexel / s
- Environ 50% de pipelines plus haut: 768 versus 512
- Environ 32% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,084 gflops versus 819.2 gflops
- 4x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 4 GB versus 1 GB
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3721 versus 2873
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3721 versus 2873
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 45.18 GTexel / s versus 25.6 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 768 versus 512 |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,084 gflops versus 819.2 gflops |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 4 GB versus 1 GB |
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3721 versus 2873 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3721 versus 2873 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 250E
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K3100M
| 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 250E | NVIDIA Quadro K3100M |
|---|---|---|
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 21.562 | 19.239 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 582.073 | 426.305 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.2 | 1.356 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 38.669 | 15.251 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 98.052 | 38.135 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2873 | 3721 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3698 | 2502 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 | 2616 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2873 | 3721 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3698 | 2502 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 | 2616 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 | 0 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2264 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 323 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 6294 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon R7 250E | NVIDIA Quadro K3100M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |
| Nom de code | Cape Verde | GK104 |
| Date de sortie | 20 December 2013 | 23 July 2013 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $109 | $1,999 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1067 | 1068 |
| Genre | Desktop | Mobile workstation |
| Prix maintenant | $1,999 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 1.38 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse du noyau | 800 MHz | 706 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 819.2 gflops | 1,084 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 512 | 768 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 25.6 GTexel / s | 45.18 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 55 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,500 million | 3,540 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| Display Port | 1.2 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Longeur | 168 mm | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
| Taille du laptop | large | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 5 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 1 GB | 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 72 GB / s | 102.4 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4500 MHz | 3200 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView Display Management | ||
| Optimus | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon R7 250E avec des autres
AMDRadeon R7 250E vs
NVIDIAGeForce4 MX 440-SE
AMDRadeon R7 250E vs
NVIDIAGeForce FX Go5300
AMDRadeon R7 250E vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 1400
AMDRadeon R7 250E vs
NVIDIAGeForce 9800 GT
AMDRadeon R7 250E vs
NVIDIAQuadro K3100M
AMDRadeon R7 250E vs
AMDFirePro W4190M
