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: 4511 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 | 4511 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 | 4511 | 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) |