AMD Radeon R7 350 versus NVIDIA Quadro 2000
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R7 350 and NVIDIA Quadro 2000 pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire. Analyse du performance de référence des cartes vidéo: Geekbench - OpenCL, 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), PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R7 350
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 5 ans 6 mois plus tard
- Environ 28% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 800 MHz versus 625 MHz
- Environ 28% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 25.6 GTexel / s versus 20 GTexel / s
- 2.7x plus de pipelines: 512 versus 192
- Environ 71% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 819.2 gflops versus 480.0 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 28 nm versus 40 nm
- Environ 13% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 55 Watt versus 62 Watt
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 2 GB versus 1 GB
- Environ 73% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 4500 MHz versus 2600 MHz
- 2x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 7787 versus 3879
- 2.5x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 25.508 versus 10.229
- 2.5x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 647.813 versus 258.26
- 3.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.72 versus 0.885
- 3.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 44.6 versus 13.688
- 5.8x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 109.558 versus 19.02
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2072 versus 1600
- Environ 86% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3122 versus 1682
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 versus 2668
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2072 versus 1600
- Environ 86% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3122 versus 1682
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 versus 2668
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 6 July 2016 versus 24 December 2010 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 800 MHz versus 625 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 25.6 GTexel / s versus 20 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 512 versus 192 |
| Performance á point flottant | 819.2 gflops versus 480.0 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm versus 40 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 55 Watt versus 62 Watt |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 2 GB versus 1 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4500 MHz versus 2600 MHz |
| Référence | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 7787 versus 3879 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 25.508 versus 10.229 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 647.813 versus 258.26 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.72 versus 0.885 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 44.6 versus 13.688 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 109.558 versus 19.02 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2072 versus 1600 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3122 versus 1682 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 2668 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2072 versus 1600 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3122 versus 1682 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 2668 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 350
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro 2000
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| 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 350 | NVIDIA Quadro 2000 |
|---|---|---|
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 7787 | 3879 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 25.508 | 10.229 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 647.813 | 258.26 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.72 | 0.885 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 44.6 | 13.688 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 109.558 | 19.02 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2072 | 1600 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3122 | 1682 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 2668 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2072 | 1600 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3122 | 1682 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 2668 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 947 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 303 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon R7 350 | NVIDIA Quadro 2000 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Fermi |
| Nom de code | Cape Verde | GF106 |
| Date de sortie | 6 July 2016 | 24 December 2010 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1083 | 1287 |
| Genre | Desktop | Workstation |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $599 | |
| Prix maintenant | $87.99 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 17.65 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse du noyau | 800 MHz | 625 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 819.2 gflops | 480.0 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 512 | 192 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 25.6 GTexel / s | 20 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 55 Watt | 62 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,500 million | 1,170 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 168 mm | 178 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 1 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 72 GB / s | 41.6 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4500 MHz | 2600 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon R7 350 avec des autres
AMDRadeon R7 350 vs
ATIRadeon 9100
AMDRadeon R7 350 vs
ATIRadeon 9800 XT
AMDRadeon R7 350 vs
AMDFirePro M4150
AMDRadeon R7 350 vs
IntelIris Graphics 6100
AMDRadeon R7 350 vs
NVIDIAQuadro M500M
AMDRadeon R7 350 vs
IntelUHD Graphics P630
