AMD Radeon R9 270X versus AMD FirePro S10000
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R9 270X and AMD FirePro S10000 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, 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, Geekbench - OpenCL.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 270X
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 10 mois plus tard
- Environ 11% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1050 MHz versus 950 MHz
- 4.2x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 180 Watt versus 750 Watt
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 4869 versus 4768
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 613 versus 502
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8068 versus 7867
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3706 versus 3621
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3350 versus 3321
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8068 versus 7867
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3706 versus 3621
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3350 versus 3321
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 8 October 2013 versus 12 November 2012 |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1050 MHz versus 950 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 180 Watt versus 750 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4869 versus 4768 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 613 versus 502 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8068 versus 7867 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3706 versus 3621 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3350 versus 3321 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8068 versus 7867 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3706 versus 3621 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3350 versus 3321 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD FirePro S10000
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 2x 106.4 GTexel / s billion / sec versus 84 GTexel / s
- 3.2x plus de pipelines: 4096 versus 1280
- 2.5x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2x 3,405 gflops versus 2,688 gflops
- 3x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 6 GB versus 2 GB
- Environ 16% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 73.836 versus 63.87
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 6.978 versus 6.354
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 2x 106.4 GTexel / s billion / sec versus 84 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 4096 versus 1280 |
| Performance á point flottant | 2x 3,405 gflops versus 2,688 gflops |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 6 GB versus 2 GB |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 73.836 versus 63.87 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.978 versus 6.354 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 270X
GPU 2: AMD FirePro S10000
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/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 R9 270X | AMD FirePro S10000 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4869 | 4768 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 613 | 502 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 63.87 | 73.836 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1314.72 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.354 | 6.978 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 85.21 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 315.412 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8068 | 7867 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3706 | 3621 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3350 | 3321 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8068 | 7867 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3706 | 3621 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3350 | 3321 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1772 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 30631 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon R9 270X | AMD FirePro S10000 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Nom de code | Curacao | Tahiti |
| Conception | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
| Date de sortie | 8 October 2013 | 12 November 2012 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $199 | $3,599 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 440 | 443 |
| Prix maintenant | $399 | |
| Genre | Desktop | Workstation |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 16.05 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1050 MHz | 950 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,688 gflops | 2x 3,405 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 1280 | 4096 |
| Stream Processors | 1280 | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 84 GTexel / s | 2x 106.4 GTexel / s billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 180 Watt | 750 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 2,800 million | 4,313 million |
| Vitesse du noyau | 825 MHz | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 2 x 6-pin | 2x 8-pin |
| Facteur de forme | Full Height / Full Length | |
| Longeur | 305 mm | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (11_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 6 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 179.2 GB/s | 480 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 256 Bit | 2x 384 Bit |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5000 MHz | |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| AppAcceleration | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| DDMA audio | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| HD3D | ||
| LiquidVR | ||
| TressFX | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon R9 270X avec des autres
AMDRadeon R9 270X vs
NVIDIAGeForce 9800 GTX
AMDRadeon R9 270X vs
AMDFirePro W8000
AMDRadeon R9 270X vs
AMDFirePro S10000
AMDRadeon R9 270X vs
AMDRadeon HD 8830M
AMDRadeon R9 270X vs
AMDRadeon R9 285
AMDRadeon R9 270X vs
NVIDIAP106-100
