AMD Radeon R7 250X versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R7 250X and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 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, Geekbench - OpenCL.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R7 250X
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 3 ans 3 mois plus tard
- Environ 25% de pipelines plus haut: 640 versus 512
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 28 nm versus 40 nm
- 3.1x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 80 Watt versus 244 Watt
- Environ 33% plus de taille maximale de mémoire: 2 GB versus 1536 MB
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 637 versus 490
- Environ 61% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 51.987 versus 32.378
- Environ 15% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 151.963 versus 132.363
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 13 February 2014 versus 9 November 2010 |
| Pipelines | 640 versus 512 |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm versus 40 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 80 Watt versus 244 Watt |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 2 GB versus 1536 MB |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 637 versus 490 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 51.987 versus 32.378 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 151.963 versus 132.363 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 3357 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 3357 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580
- Environ 30% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 49.4 billion / sec versus 38 GTexel / s
- Environ 30% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,581.1 gflops versus 1,216 gflops
- Environ 23% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 2004 MHz (4008 data rate) versus 1625 MHz
- 2x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 4630 versus 2269
- Environ 24% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 40.048 versus 32.22
- Environ 37% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 872.651 versus 638.532
- Environ 46% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 4.338 versus 2.963
- Environ 52% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5953 versus 3916
- Environ 52% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5953 versus 3916
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 49.4 billion / sec versus 38 GTexel / s |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,581.1 gflops versus 1,216 gflops |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 2004 MHz (4008 data rate) versus 1625 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4630 versus 2269 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 40.048 versus 32.22 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 872.651 versus 638.532 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.338 versus 2.963 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5953 versus 3916 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3717 versus 3716 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5953 versus 3916 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3717 versus 3716 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 250X
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580
| 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 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2269 | 4630 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 637 | 490 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 32.22 | 40.048 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 638.532 | 872.651 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.963 | 4.338 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 51.987 | 32.378 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 151.963 | 132.363 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3916 | 5953 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3716 | 3717 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3357 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3916 | 5953 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3716 | 3717 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3357 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 | 809 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 15182 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon R7 250X | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Fermi 2.0 |
| Nom de code | Cape Verde | GF110 |
| Conception | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series | |
| Date de sortie | 13 February 2014 | 9 November 2010 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $99 | $499 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 659 | 620 |
| Prix maintenant | $260.70 | $289.88 |
| Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 11.25 | 19.21 |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1000 MHz | |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,216 gflops | 1,581.1 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 640 | 512 |
| Stream Processors | 640 | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 38 GTexel / s | 49.4 billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 80 Watt | 244 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,500 million | 3,000 million |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1544 MHz | |
| Noyaux CUDA | 512 | |
| Température maximale du GPU | 97 °C | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort | Mini HDMITwo Dual Link DVI, 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
| Contribution d’audio pour HDMI | Internal | |
| Résolution VGA maximale | 2048x1536 | |
| Soutien de plusiers moniteurs | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | PCI-E 2.0 x 16 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 210 mm | 10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm) |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1 x 6-pin | One 6-pin and One 8-pin |
| Hauteur | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | |
| Options SLI | 3-way | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.2 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 1536 MB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 96 GB/s | 192.4 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1625 MHz | 2004 MHz (4008 data rate) |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| DDMA audio | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| 3D Vision | ||
| CUDA | ||
| DSR | ||
| SLI | ||
| Surround | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon R7 250X avec des autres
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
AMDRadeon HD 6970
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
IntelIris Pro Graphics 5200
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
AMDFirePro D300
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
AMDRadeon R9 M280X
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
AMDFirePro W6150M
AMDRadeon R7 250X vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q
