AMD Radeon R7 Graphics versus AMD Radeon R9 270
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R7 Graphics and AMD Radeon R9 270 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: 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, PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R7 Graphics
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 6 mois plus tard
- 10x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 15 Watt versus 150 Watt
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 31 May 2016 versus 13 November 2013 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt versus 150 Watt |
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 3347 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 270
- Environ 22% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 925 MHz versus 758 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 74 GTexel / s versus 16.46 GTexel / s
- 3.3x plus de pipelines: 1280 versus 384
- 4.5x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2,368 gflops versus 526.8 gflops
- 3.3x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 74175 versus 22612
- 3.7x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 55.721 versus 15.145
- 6.2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1282.039 versus 206.354
- 4.9x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.927 versus 1.2
- 3.9x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 93.116 versus 24.15
- 3.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 261.843 versus 85.46
- Environ 74% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3448 versus 1979
- Environ 76% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3699 versus 2101
- 102.9x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3448 versus 33.5
- 109.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3699 versus 33.9
- 55.8x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3347 versus 60
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1603 versus 1457
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse augmenté | 925 MHz versus 758 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 74 GTexel / s versus 16.46 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1280 versus 384 |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,368 gflops versus 526.8 gflops |
| Référence | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 74175 versus 22612 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 55.721 versus 15.145 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1282.039 versus 206.354 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.927 versus 1.2 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 93.116 versus 24.15 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 261.843 versus 85.46 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3448 versus 1979 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3699 versus 2101 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3448 versus 33.5 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3699 versus 33.9 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3347 versus 60 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1603 versus 1457 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 Graphics
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 270
| 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 |
|
|
| Nom | AMD Radeon R7 Graphics | AMD Radeon R9 270 |
|---|---|---|
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 22612 | 74175 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 15.145 | 55.721 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 206.354 | 1282.039 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.2 | 5.927 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 24.15 | 93.116 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 85.46 | 261.843 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1979 | 3448 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2101 | 3699 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3347 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 33.5 | 3448 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 33.9 | 3699 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 60 | 3347 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1457 | 1603 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4306 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 567 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon R7 Graphics | AMD Radeon R9 270 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Nom de code | Wani | Curacao |
| Date de sortie | 31 May 2016 | 13 November 2013 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1435 | 501 |
| Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
| Conception | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $179 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 758 MHz | 925 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 200 MHz | |
| Performance á point flottant | 526.8 gflops | 2,368 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | 1280 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 16.46 GTexel / s | 74 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 150 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 2,410 million | 2,800 million |
| Stream Processors | 1280 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | IGP | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | |
| Longeur | 210 mm | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1 x 6-pin | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| Genre de mémoire | System Shared | GDDR5 |
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 179.2 GB/s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 256 Bit | |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| DDMA audio | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| HD3D | ||
| LiquidVR | ||
| TressFX | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon R7 Graphics avec des autres
AMDRadeon R7 Graphics vs
ATIRadeon 7200
AMDRadeon R7 Graphics vs
NVIDIAGeForce2 Go
AMDRadeon R7 Graphics vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 720M
AMDRadeon R7 Graphics vs
NVIDIAGeForce 810M
AMDRadeon R7 Graphics vs
AMDRadeon R7 M360
AMDRadeon R7 Graphics vs
IntelHD Graphics 515
