AMD Radeon R9 350 versus Intel UHD Graphics 630
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R9 350 and Intel UHD Graphics 630 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, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 350
- 2.6x plus de vitesse du noyau: 925 MHz versus 350 MHz
- 32x plus de pipelines: 768 versus 24
- 2.1x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 9926 versus 4657
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2609 versus 1870
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2609 versus 1870
- 2.5x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3911 versus 1596
- 2.5x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3911 versus 1596
- 2.9x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 9664 versus 3309
- 2.9x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 9664 versus 3309
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 925 MHz versus 350 MHz |
| Pipelines | 768 versus 24 |
| Référence | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 9926 versus 4657 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2609 versus 1870 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2609 versus 1870 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3911 versus 1596 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3911 versus 1596 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 9664 versus 3309 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 9664 versus 3309 |
Raisons pour considerer le Intel UHD Graphics 630
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 2 mois plus tard
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 28 nm
- 6.3x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 15 Watt versus 95 Watt
| Date de sortie | 1 September 2017 versus 12 June 2015 |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt versus 95 Watt |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 350
GPU 2: Intel UHD Graphics 630
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Nom | AMD Radeon R9 350 | Intel UHD Graphics 630 |
|---|---|---|
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 9926 | 4657 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2609 | 1870 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2609 | 1870 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3911 | 1596 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3911 | 1596 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 9664 | 3309 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 9664 | 3309 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1237 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 299 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 27.517 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 354.254 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.807 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 20.323 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 29.327 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 68 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon R9 350 | Intel UHD Graphics 630 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Tobago | Generation 9.5 |
| Date de sortie | 12 June 2015 | 1 September 2017 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 585 | 1234 |
| Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
| Nom de code | Coffee Lake GT2 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse du noyau | 925 MHz | 350 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 1421 GFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 768 | 24 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 95 Watt | 15 Watt |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1200 MHz | |
| Performance á point flottant | 460.8 gflops | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 28.8 GTexel / s | |
| Compte de transistor | 189 million | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 2 x DisplayPort, DVI | No outputs |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| HDCP | ||
| Nombre d’écrans á la fois | 4 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x1 |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.3 | 4.6 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 72 GB/s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | 64 / 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1125 MHz (4500 MHz effective) | |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | |
| Mémoire partagé | 1 | |
Technologies |
||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
| Quick Sync | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon R9 350 avec des autres
AMDRadeon R9 350 vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 540
AMDRadeon R9 350 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 6500
AMDRadeon R9 350 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 645 OEM
AMDRadeon R9 350 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 (Desktop)
AMDRadeon R9 350 vs
NVIDIAQuadro M620 Mobile
AMDRadeon R9 350 vs
NVIDIAQuadro P620
