AMD Radeon R7 250E versus NVIDIA Quadro K4100M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R7 250E and NVIDIA Quadro K4100M 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 82% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 55 Watt versus 100 Watt
- Environ 41% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 4500 MHz versus 3200 MHz
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 38.669 versus 35.452
- Environ 58% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 98.052 versus 61.984
- 2.6x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2873 versus 1105
- Environ 87% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3698 versus 1974
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3355 versus 3246
- 2.6x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2873 versus 1105
- Environ 87% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3698 versus 1974
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3355 versus 3246
| 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 100 Watt |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4500 MHz versus 3200 MHz |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 38.669 versus 35.452 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 98.052 versus 61.984 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2873 versus 1105 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3698 versus 1974 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 versus 3246 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2873 versus 1105 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3698 versus 1974 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 versus 3246 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro K4100M
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 67.78 GTexel / s versus 25.6 GTexel / s
- 2.3x plus de pipelines: 1152 versus 512
- Environ 99% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,627 gflops versus 819.2 gflops
- 4x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 4 GB versus 1 GB
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 24.487 versus 21.562
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 600.985 versus 582.073
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.281 versus 2.2
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 67.78 GTexel / s versus 25.6 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1152 versus 512 |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,627 gflops versus 819.2 gflops |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 4 GB versus 1 GB |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 24.487 versus 21.562 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 600.985 versus 582.073 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.281 versus 2.2 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 250E
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K4100M
| 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 K4100M |
|---|---|---|
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 21.562 | 24.487 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 582.073 | 600.985 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.2 | 2.281 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 38.669 | 35.452 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 98.052 | 61.984 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2873 | 1105 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3698 | 1974 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 | 3246 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2873 | 1105 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3698 | 1974 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 | 3246 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2756 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 325 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 8787 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon R7 250E | NVIDIA Quadro K4100M | |
|---|---|---|
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 | $1,499 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1083 | 1084 |
| Genre | Desktop | Mobile workstation |
| Prix maintenant | $379.99 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 9.50 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse du noyau | 800 MHz | 706 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 819.2 gflops | 1,627 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 512 | 1152 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 25.6 GTexel / s | 67.78 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 55 Watt | 100 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 Ti 4200
AMDRadeon R7 250E vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 545
AMDRadeon R7 250E vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 5570
AMDRadeon R7 250E vs
NVIDIAQuadro K4100M
AMDRadeon R7 250E vs
IntelIris Graphics 6100
AMDRadeon R7 250E vs
NVIDIAQuadro M500M
