AMD Radeon R7 M445 versus NVIDIA GeForce GT 540M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R7 M445 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 540M 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 M445
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 5 ans 4 mois plus tard
- Environ 16% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 780 MHz versus 672 MHz
- Environ 70% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 18.4 GTexel / s versus 10.8 billion / sec
- 3.3x plus de pipelines: 320 versus 96
- 2.3x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 588.8 gflops versus 258.05 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 28 nm versus 40 nm
- Environ 40% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 15-25 Watt versus 35 Watt
- 4x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 4 GB versus 1 GB
- 4.4x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 4000 MHz versus 900 MHz
- Environ 96% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 939 versus 478
- Environ 93% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 176 versus 91
- 2.5x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 5361 versus 2171
- 3.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 15.765 versus 4.85
- Environ 42% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 278.624 versus 195.796
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.268 versus 0.561
- 2.7x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 24.335 versus 9.109
- 3.2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 54.067 versus 16.727
- Environ 99% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1913 versus 960
- Environ 99% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1913 versus 960
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 15 May 2016 versus 5 January 2011 |
Vitesse du noyau | 780 MHz versus 672 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 18.4 GTexel / s versus 10.8 billion / sec |
Pipelines | 320 versus 96 |
Performance á point flottant | 588.8 gflops versus 258.05 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm versus 40 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15-25 Watt versus 35 Watt |
Taille de mémore maximale | 4 GB versus 1 GB |
Vitesse de mémoire | 4000 MHz versus 900 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 939 versus 478 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 176 versus 91 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 5361 versus 2171 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 15.765 versus 4.85 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 278.624 versus 195.796 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.268 versus 0.561 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 24.335 versus 9.109 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 54.067 versus 16.727 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1913 versus 960 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1913 versus 960 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GT 540M
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2210 versus 2138
- Environ 46% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2701 versus 1853
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2210 versus 2138
- Environ 46% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2701 versus 1853
Référence | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2210 versus 2138 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2701 versus 1853 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2210 versus 2138 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2701 versus 1853 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 M445
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 540M
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 M445 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 540M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 939 | 478 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 176 | 91 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 5361 | 2171 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 15.765 | 4.85 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 278.624 | 195.796 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.268 | 0.561 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 24.335 | 9.109 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 54.067 | 16.727 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1913 | 960 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2138 | 2210 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1853 | 2701 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1913 | 960 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2138 | 2210 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1853 | 2701 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
AMD Radeon R7 M445 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 540M | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | GCN 3.0 | Fermi |
Nom de code | Meso | GF108 |
Date de sortie | 15 May 2016 | 5 January 2011 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1296 | 1503 |
Genre | Laptop | Laptop |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 920 MHz | |
Vitesse du noyau | 780 MHz | 672 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 588.8 gflops | 258.05 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 320 | 96 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 18.4 GTexel / s | 10.8 billion / sec |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15-25 Watt | 35 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 3,100 million | 585 million |
Noyaux CUDA | 96 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | MXM-A (3.0) |
Taille du laptop | large | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 12 API |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Vulkan | ||
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 4 GB | 1 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 32 GB / s | 28.8 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 4000 MHz | 900 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | DDR3 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
3D Blu-Ray | ||
3D Gaming | ||
3D Vision | ||
3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
CUDA | ||
DirectCompute | ||
DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
Optimus |