AMD Radeon R9 285 versus AMD Radeon R9 270X
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R9 285 and AMD Radeon R9 270X 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.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 285
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 10 mois plus tard
- Environ 22% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 102.8 GTexel / s versus 84 GTexel / s
- Environ 40% de pipelines plus haut: 1792 versus 1280
- Environ 22% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 3,290 gflops versus 2,688 gflops
- Environ 37% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 6680 versus 4889
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 72.799 versus 63.87
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1474.632 versus 1314.72
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 91.954 versus 85.21
- Environ 24% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 391.399 versus 315.412
- Environ 57% meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 2778 versus 1771
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 2 September 2014 versus 8 October 2013 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 102.8 GTexel / s versus 84 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1792 versus 1280 |
| Performance á point flottant | 3,290 gflops versus 2,688 gflops |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6680 versus 4889 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 72.799 versus 63.87 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1474.632 versus 1314.72 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.369 versus 6.354 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 91.954 versus 85.21 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 391.399 versus 315.412 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2778 versus 1771 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 270X
- Environ 6% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 180 Watt versus 190 Watt
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 611 versus 597
- Environ 25% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8068 versus 6474
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3706 versus 3043
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3350 versus 2782
- Environ 25% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8068 versus 6474
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3706 versus 3043
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3350 versus 2782
| Caractéristiques | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 180 Watt versus 190 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 611 versus 597 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8068 versus 6474 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3706 versus 3043 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3350 versus 2782 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8068 versus 6474 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3706 versus 3043 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3350 versus 2782 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 285
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 270X
| 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 |
|
|
| Nom | AMD Radeon R9 285 | AMD Radeon R9 270X |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6680 | 4889 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 597 | 611 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 72.799 | 63.87 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1474.632 | 1314.72 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.369 | 6.354 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 91.954 | 85.21 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 391.399 | 315.412 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6474 | 8068 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3043 | 3706 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2782 | 3350 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6474 | 8068 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3043 | 3706 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2782 | 3350 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2778 | 1771 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon R9 285 | AMD Radeon R9 270X | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Nom de code | Tonga | Curacao |
| Conception | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series |
| Date de sortie | 2 September 2014 | 8 October 2013 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $249 | $199 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 445 | 439 |
| Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
| Prix maintenant | $399 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 16.05 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse du noyau | 918 MHz | |
| Performance á point flottant | 3,290 gflops | 2,688 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 1792 | 1280 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 102.8 GTexel / s | 84 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 190 Watt | 180 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 5,000 million | 2,800 million |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1050 MHz | |
| Stream Processors | 1280 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| VGA | ||
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 221 mm | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 2x 6-pin | 2 x 6-pin |
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 176.0 GB / s | 179.2 GB/s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5500 MHz | |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| HD3D | ||
| LiquidVR | ||
| TressFX | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| AppAcceleration | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| DDMA audio | ||
| FreeSync | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon R9 285 avec des autres
AMDRadeon R9 285 vs
ATIFireGL V3400
AMDRadeon R9 285 vs
NVIDIAQuadro NVS 440
AMDRadeon R9 285 vs
ATIFirePro 2460 Multi-View
AMDRadeon R9 285 vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 530v
AMDRadeon R9 285 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX TITAN BLACK
AMDRadeon R9 285 vs
AMDRadeon RX Vega 6
