AMD Radeon R7 250X versus AMD Radeon HD 6990
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R7 250X and AMD Radeon HD 6990 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, 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 250X
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 11 mois plus tard
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 28 nm versus 40 nm
- 4.7x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 80 Watt versus 375 Watt
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 637 versus 532
- Environ 87% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 32.22 versus 17.264
- Environ 68% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.963 versus 1.76
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 13 February 2014 versus 8 March 2011 |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm versus 40 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 80 Watt versus 375 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 637 versus 532 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 32.22 versus 17.264 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.963 versus 1.76 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3716 versus 3713 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 3356 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3716 versus 3713 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 3356 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon HD 6990
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 2x 79.7 GTexel / s billion / sec versus 38 GTexel / s
- 4.8x plus de pipelines: 2x 1536 versus 640
- 4.2x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2x 2,549.8 gflops versus 1,216 gflops
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 2x 2 GB versus 2 GB
- 3.1x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 5000 MHz versus 1625 MHz
- Environ 33% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3014 versus 2269
- Environ 32% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 840.452 versus 638.532
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 53.903 versus 51.987
- Environ 75% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 265.302 versus 151.963
- Environ 16% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4562 versus 3916
- Environ 16% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4562 versus 3916
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 2x 79.7 GTexel / s billion / sec versus 38 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 2x 1536 versus 640 |
| Performance á point flottant | 2x 2,549.8 gflops versus 1,216 gflops |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 2x 2 GB versus 2 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5000 MHz versus 1625 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3014 versus 2269 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 840.452 versus 638.532 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 53.903 versus 51.987 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 265.302 versus 151.963 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4562 versus 3916 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4562 versus 3916 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 250X
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 6990
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| 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 250X | AMD Radeon HD 6990 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2269 | 3014 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 637 | 532 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 32.22 | 17.264 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 638.532 | 840.452 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.963 | 1.76 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 51.987 | 53.903 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 151.963 | 265.302 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3916 | 4562 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3716 | 3713 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3356 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3916 | 4562 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3716 | 3713 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3356 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon R7 250X | AMD Radeon HD 6990 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | TeraScale 3 |
| Nom de code | Cape Verde | Antilles |
| Conception | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series | |
| Date de sortie | 13 February 2014 | 8 March 2011 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $99 | $699 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 663 | 665 |
| Prix maintenant | $260.70 | $159.99 |
| Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 11.25 | 27.81 |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1000 MHz | |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,216 gflops | 2x 2,549.8 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 640 | 2x 1536 |
| Stream Processors | 640 | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 38 GTexel / s | 2x 79.7 GTexel / s billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 80 Watt | 375 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,500 million | 2,640 million |
| Vitesse du noyau | 830 MHz | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 4x mini-DisplayPort |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 210 mm | 295 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1 x 6-pin | 2x 8-pin |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 11.2 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 2x 2 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 96 GB/s | 2x 160.0 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 2x 256 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1625 MHz | 5000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| DDMA audio | ||
| FreeSync | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon R7 250X avec des autres
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
NVIDIAGeForce PCX 5900
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
AMDRadeon HD 6990
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
AMDRadeon R9 260 OEM
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
AMDRadeon R9 360 OEM
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
AMDFirePro W6150M
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
AMDFirePro S7150
