AMD Radeon R7 M460 versus AMD Radeon R7 240
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R7 M460 and AMD Radeon R7 240 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 M460
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 7 mois plus tard
- Environ 44% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1125 MHz versus 780 MHz
- Environ 73% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 27 GTexel / s versus 15.6 GTexel / s
- Environ 20% de pipelines plus haut: 384 versus 320
- Environ 73% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 864.0 gflops versus 499.2 gflops
- Environ 57% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 1800 MHz versus 1150 MHz
- Environ 17% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1053 versus 898
- Environ 47% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 19.679 versus 13.344
- Environ 23% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 358.673 versus 290.632
- Environ 25% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.572 versus 1.262
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 30.024 versus 21.59
- Environ 41% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 85.168 versus 60.326
- Environ 36% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2294 versus 1688
- Environ 36% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2294 versus 1688
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 15 May 2016 versus 8 October 2013 |
Vitesse augmenté | 1125 MHz versus 780 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 27 GTexel / s versus 15.6 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 384 versus 320 |
Performance á point flottant | 864.0 gflops versus 499.2 gflops |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1800 MHz versus 1150 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1053 versus 898 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 19.679 versus 13.344 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 358.673 versus 290.632 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.572 versus 1.262 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 30.024 versus 21.59 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 85.168 versus 60.326 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2294 versus 1688 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2294 versus 1688 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R7 240
- Environ 36% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 272 versus 200
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 5251 versus 4999
- Environ 33% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2342 versus 1767
- Environ 21% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3353 versus 2772
- Environ 33% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2342 versus 1767
- Environ 21% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3353 versus 2772
Référence | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 272 versus 200 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 5251 versus 4999 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2342 versus 1767 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 versus 2772 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2342 versus 1767 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 versus 2772 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R7 M460
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 240
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 M460 | AMD Radeon R7 240 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1053 | 898 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 200 | 272 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 4999 | 5251 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 19.679 | 13.344 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 358.673 | 290.632 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.572 | 1.262 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 30.024 | 21.59 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 85.168 | 60.326 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2294 | 1688 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1767 | 2342 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2772 | 3353 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2294 | 1688 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1767 | 2342 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2772 | 3353 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
AMD Radeon R7 M460 | AMD Radeon R7 240 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | GCN 3.0 | GCN 1.0 |
Nom de code | Meso | Oland |
Date de sortie | 15 May 2016 | 8 October 2013 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1243 | 1245 |
Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
Conception | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series | |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $69 | |
Prix maintenant | $49.99 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 24.92 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1125 MHz | 780 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 1100 MHz | |
Performance á point flottant | 864.0 gflops | 499.2 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 384 | 320 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 27 GTexel / s | 15.6 GTexel / s |
Compte de transistor | 3,100 million | 1,040 million |
Stream Processors | 320 | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
HDMI | ||
VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | |
Longeur | 168 mm | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | N / A | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 12 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 2 GB | 2 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 14.4 GB / s | 72 GB/s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1800 MHz | 1150 MHz |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Genre de mémoire | DDR3 | |
Technologies |
||
CrossFire | ||
DDMA audio | ||
FreeSync |