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: 4509 versus 4432
- 2.9x meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 606 versus 210
- 6x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 86561 versus 14510
- 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 | 4509 versus 4432 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 606 versus 210 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 86561 versus 14510 |
| 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 | 4509 | 4432 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 606 | 210 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 86561 | 14510 |
| 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 | 420 | 418 |
| 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) | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon R7 370 avec des autres
AMDRadeon R7 370 vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 350
AMDRadeon R7 370 vs
ATIRadeon X1650 GTO
AMDRadeon R7 370 vs
NVIDIAQuadro 5000M
AMDRadeon R7 370 vs
NVIDIATesla K20m
AMDRadeon R7 370 vs
AMDRadeon HD 7990
AMDRadeon R7 370 vs
AppleM1 7-core
