AMD Radeon R7 450 OEM versus NVIDIA Quadro K5100M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R7 450 OEM and NVIDIA Quadro K5100M 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).
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R7 450 OEM
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 11 mois plus tard
- Environ 20% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 925 MHz versus 771 MHz
- Environ 54% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 65 Watt versus 100 Watt
- Environ 25% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 4500 MHz versus 3600 MHz
- Environ 50% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 524 versus 349
- 4.2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 24.788 versus 5.972
- Environ 80% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 638.196 versus 355.305
- 2.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.619 versus 1.022
- 2.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 41.414 versus 15.706
- 3.2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 112.347 versus 34.772
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 30 June 2016 versus 23 July 2013 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 925 MHz versus 771 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt versus 100 Watt |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4500 MHz versus 3600 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 524 versus 349 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 24.788 versus 5.972 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 638.196 versus 355.305 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.619 versus 1.022 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 41.414 versus 15.706 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 112.347 versus 34.772 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro K5100M
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 98.69 GTexel / s versus 29.6 GTexel / s
- 3x plus de pipelines: 1536 versus 512
- 2.5x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2,369 gflops versus 947.2 gflops
- 4x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 8 GB versus 2 GB
- Environ 69% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3211 versus 1901
- Environ 18% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 11427 versus 9662
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6747 versus 2809
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3715 versus 3666
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6747 versus 2809
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3715 versus 3666
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 98.69 GTexel / s versus 29.6 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1536 versus 512 |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,369 gflops versus 947.2 gflops |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 8 GB versus 2 GB |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3211 versus 1901 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 11427 versus 9662 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6747 versus 2809 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 versus 3666 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3362 versus 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6747 versus 2809 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 versus 3666 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3362 versus 3358 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 450 OEM
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K5100M
| 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 450 OEM | NVIDIA Quadro K5100M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1901 | 3211 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 524 | 349 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 9662 | 11427 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 24.788 | 5.972 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 638.196 | 355.305 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.619 | 1.022 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 41.414 | 15.706 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 112.347 | 34.772 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2809 | 6747 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3666 | 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3362 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2809 | 6747 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3666 | 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3362 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon R7 450 OEM | NVIDIA Quadro K5100M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |
| Nom de code | Cape Verde | GK104 |
| Date de sortie | 30 June 2016 | 23 July 2013 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 776 | 778 |
| Genre | Desktop | Mobile workstation |
| Prix maintenant | $309.99 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 13.80 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse du noyau | 925 MHz | 771 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 947.2 gflops | 2,369 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 512 | 1536 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 29.6 GTexel / s | 98.69 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,500 million | 3,540 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
| Display Port | 1.2 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 6-pin | |
| Taille du laptop | large | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 5 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 8 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 72 GB / s | 115.2 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4500 MHz | 3600 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView Display Management | ||
| Optimus | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon R7 450 OEM avec des autres
AMDRadeon R7 450 OEM vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 590
AMDRadeon R7 450 OEM vs
NVIDIAQuadro K5100M
AMDRadeon R7 450 OEM vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 880M
AMDRadeon R7 450 OEM vs
NVIDIAQuadro M1200 Mobile
AMDRadeon R7 450 OEM vs
NVIDIAQuadro P520
AMDRadeon R7 450 OEM vs
NVIDIAGeForce MX330
