AMD Radeon R7 250X versus AMD Radeon HD 7950 Mac Edition
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R7 250X and AMD Radeon HD 7950 Mac Edition 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 11 mois plus tard
- 2.5x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 80 Watt versus 200 Watt
| Date de sortie | 13 February 2014 versus 7 March 2013 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 80 Watt versus 200 Watt |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon HD 7950 Mac Edition
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 89.6 GTexel / s versus 38 GTexel / s
- 2.8x plus de pipelines: 1792 versus 640
- 2.4x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2,867 gflops versus 1,216 gflops
- Environ 50% plus de taille maximale de mémoire: 3 GB versus 2 GB
- 3.1x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 5000 MHz versus 1625 MHz
- 2.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 67.802 versus 32.22
- Environ 93% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1230.769 versus 638.532
- Environ 57% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 81.68 versus 51.987
- 2.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 370.179 versus 151.963
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 89.6 GTexel / s versus 38 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1792 versus 640 |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,867 gflops versus 1,216 gflops |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 3 GB versus 2 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5000 MHz versus 1625 MHz |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 67.802 versus 32.22 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1230.769 versus 638.532 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 81.68 versus 51.987 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 370.179 versus 151.963 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 250X
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 7950 Mac Edition
| 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) |
|
|
| Nom | AMD Radeon R7 250X | AMD Radeon HD 7950 Mac Edition |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2269 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 637 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 32.22 | 67.802 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 638.532 | 1230.769 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.963 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 51.987 | 81.68 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 151.963 | 370.179 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3916 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3716 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3916 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3716 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon R7 250X | AMD Radeon HD 7950 Mac Edition | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Nom de code | Cape Verde | Tahiti |
| Conception | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series | |
| Date de sortie | 13 February 2014 | 7 March 2013 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $99 | $449 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 666 | 667 |
| Prix maintenant | $260.70 | |
| Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 11.25 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1000 MHz | |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,216 gflops | 2,867 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 640 | 1792 |
| Stream Processors | 640 | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 38 GTexel / s | 89.6 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 80 Watt | 200 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,500 million | 4,313 million |
| Vitesse du noyau | 800 MHz | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x 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 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 210 mm | 279 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1 x 6-pin | 2x 6-pin |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (11_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 3 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 96 GB/s | 240.0 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 384 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 7150 + nForce 630i
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 415 OEM
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
AMDRadeon HD 7950 Mac Edition
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
AMDRadeon R9 360 OEM
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
IntelIris Pro Graphics P580
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
AMDRadeon RX Vega 8 Mobile
