AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM versus AMD FirePro M5100
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM and AMD FirePro M5100 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).
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 6 mois plus tard
- Environ 38% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1000 MHz versus 725 MHz
- Environ 35% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1050 MHz versus 775 MHz
- Environ 63% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 50.4 GTexel / s versus 31 GTexel / s
- Environ 20% de pipelines plus haut: 768 versus 640
- Environ 63% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,613 gflops versus 992.0 gflops
- Environ 44% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 6500 MHz versus 4500 MHz
- Environ 44% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3032 versus 2103
- 2.1x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 14269 versus 6837
- Environ 77% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 39.283 versus 22.202
- Environ 52% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 815.354 versus 537.558
- Environ 53% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.437 versus 2.245
- Environ 57% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 63.718 versus 40.642
- Environ 58% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 171.258 versus 108.052
- Environ 53% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4468 versus 2926
- Environ 53% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4468 versus 2926
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 5 May 2015 versus 16 October 2013 |
Vitesse du noyau | 1000 MHz versus 725 MHz |
Vitesse augmenté | 1050 MHz versus 775 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 50.4 GTexel / s versus 31 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 768 versus 640 |
Performance á point flottant | 1,613 gflops versus 992.0 gflops |
Vitesse de mémoire | 6500 MHz versus 4500 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3032 versus 2103 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 14269 versus 6837 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 39.283 versus 22.202 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 815.354 versus 537.558 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.437 versus 2.245 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 63.718 versus 40.642 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 171.258 versus 108.052 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4468 versus 2926 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4468 versus 2926 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD FirePro M5100
- Environ 74% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 800 versus 460
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3713 versus 3667
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 versus 3340
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3713 versus 3667
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 versus 3340
Référence | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 800 versus 460 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3713 versus 3667 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 3340 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3713 versus 3667 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 3340 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM
GPU 2: AMD FirePro M5100
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 R9 360 OEM | AMD FirePro M5100 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3032 | 2103 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 460 | 800 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 14269 | 6837 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 39.283 | 22.202 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 815.354 | 537.558 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.437 | 2.245 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 63.718 | 40.642 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 171.258 | 108.052 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4468 | 2926 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3667 | 3713 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3340 | 3358 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4468 | 2926 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3667 | 3713 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3340 | 3358 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
AMD Radeon R9 360 OEM | AMD FirePro M5100 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | GCN 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
Nom de code | Tobago | Venus |
Date de sortie | 5 May 2015 | 16 October 2013 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 641 | 643 |
Genre | Desktop | Mobile workstation |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1050 MHz | 775 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 1000 MHz | 725 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 1,613 gflops | 992.0 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 768 | 640 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 50.4 GTexel / s | 31 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 85 Watt | |
Compte de transistor | 2,080 million | 1,500 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-A (3.0) |
Longeur | 165 mm | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 6-pin | |
Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 12.0 (11_1) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 2 GB | 2 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 104.0 GB / s | 72 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 6500 MHz | 4500 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
AppAcceleration |