AMD Radeon R7 370 versus NVIDIA Tesla K20m
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R7 370 and NVIDIA Tesla K20m 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, 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R7 370
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 5 mois plus tard
- 2x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 110 Watt versus 225 Watt
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 4499 versus 4432
- 2.9x meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 610 versus 210
- 5.4x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 86561 versus 16085
- Environ 32% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 72.514 versus 54.89
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1506.404 versus 1414.755
- Environ 37% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 7.267 versus 5.303
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 116.279 versus 83.807
- Environ 44% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 359.237 versus 250.291
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 18 June 2015 versus 5 January 2013 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 110 Watt versus 225 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4499 versus 4432 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 610 versus 210 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 86561 versus 16085 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 72.514 versus 54.89 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1506.404 versus 1414.755 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 7.267 versus 5.303 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 116.279 versus 83.807 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 359.237 versus 250.291 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Tesla K20m
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 146.8 GTexel / s versus 62.4 GTexel / s
- 2.4x plus de pipelines: 2496 versus 1024
- Environ 76% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 3,524 gflops versus 1,997 gflops
- Environ 25% plus de taille maximale de mémoire: 5 GB versus 4 GB
- 5.3x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 5200 MHz versus 975 MHz
- Environ 17% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8319 versus 7102
- Environ 98% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 7337 versus 3707
- 3.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 10873 versus 3359
- Environ 17% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8319 versus 7102
- Environ 98% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 7337 versus 3707
- 3.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 10873 versus 3359
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 146.8 GTexel / s versus 62.4 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 2496 versus 1024 |
| Performance á point flottant | 3,524 gflops versus 1,997 gflops |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 5 GB versus 4 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5200 MHz versus 975 MHz |
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8319 versus 7102 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 7337 versus 3707 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 10873 versus 3359 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8319 versus 7102 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 7337 versus 3707 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 10873 versus 3359 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 370
GPU 2: NVIDIA Tesla K20m
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| 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 370 | NVIDIA Tesla K20m |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4499 | 4432 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 610 | 210 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 86561 | 16085 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 72.514 | 54.89 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1506.404 | 1414.755 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 7.267 | 5.303 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 116.279 | 83.807 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 359.237 | 250.291 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7102 | 8319 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3707 | 7337 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3359 | 10873 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7102 | 8319 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3707 | 7337 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3359 | 10873 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1499 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon R7 370 | NVIDIA Tesla K20m | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |
| Nom de code | Trinidad | GK110 |
| Conception | AMD Radeon R7 300 Series | |
| Date de sortie | 18 June 2015 | 5 January 2013 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $149 | $3,199 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 411 | 414 |
| Genre | Desktop | Workstation |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 975 MHz | |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,997 gflops | 3,524 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 1024 | 2496 |
| Stream Processors | 1024 | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 62.4 GTexel / s | 146.8 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 110 Watt | 225 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 2,800 million | 7,080 million |
| Vitesse du noyau | 706 MHz | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Nombre d’écrans Eyefinity | 6 | |
| VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 152 mm | 267 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1 x 6-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (11_0) |
| Mantle | ||
| OpenCL | 2.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 5 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 179.2 GB/s | 208.0 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 256 bit | 320 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 975 MHz | 5200 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| AppAcceleration | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| DDMA audio | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
