AMD Radeon R9 370X versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R9 370X and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire. Analyse du performance de référence des cartes vidéo: 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), PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 370X
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 5 mois plus tard
- Environ 90% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 82.4 GTexel / s versus 43.4 GTexel / s
- 2x plus de pipelines: 1280 versus 640
- Environ 90% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2,637 gflops versus 1,389 gflops
- Environ 12% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 5600 MHz versus 5012 MHz
- 2.1x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 25659 versus 12495
- Environ 31% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 65.071 versus 49.772
- Environ 50% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1139.703 versus 757.295
- Environ 47% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.39 versus 3.67
- Environ 77% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 88.44 versus 49.875
- Environ 88% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 337.583 versus 179.567
- Environ 63% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8393 versus 5157
- Environ 63% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8393 versus 5157
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 27 August 2015 versus 13 March 2015 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 82.4 GTexel / s versus 43.4 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1280 versus 640 |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,637 gflops versus 1,389 gflops |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5600 MHz versus 5012 MHz |
| Référence | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 25659 versus 12495 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 65.071 versus 49.772 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1139.703 versus 757.295 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.39 versus 3.67 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 88.44 versus 49.875 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 337.583 versus 179.567 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8393 versus 5157 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8393 versus 5157 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A
- Environ 5% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1029 MHz versus 980 MHz
- Environ 5% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1085 MHz versus 1030 MHz
- 2.4x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 75 Watt versus 180 Watt
- Environ 58% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 5834 versus 3704
- 2.3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 7859 versus 3348
- Environ 58% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 5834 versus 3704
- 2.3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 7859 versus 3348
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1029 MHz versus 980 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1085 MHz versus 1030 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt versus 180 Watt |
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 5834 versus 3704 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 7859 versus 3348 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 5834 versus 3704 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 7859 versus 3348 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 370X
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A
| 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 370X | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A |
|---|---|---|
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 25659 | 12495 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 65.071 | 49.772 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1139.703 | 757.295 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.39 | 3.67 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 88.44 | 49.875 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 337.583 | 179.567 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8393 | 5157 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3704 | 5834 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3348 | 7859 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8393 | 5157 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3704 | 5834 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3348 | 7859 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3355 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 326 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon R9 370X | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Maxwell |
| Nom de code | Trinidad | GM107 |
| Date de sortie | 27 August 2015 | 13 March 2015 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $199 | |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 552 | 553 |
| Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1030 MHz | 1085 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 980 MHz | 1029 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,637 gflops | 1,389 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 1280 | 640 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 82.4 GTexel / s | 43.4 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 180 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 2,800 million | 1,870 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Longeur | 221 mm | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 2x 6-pin | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 179.2 GB / s | 80.19 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5600 MHz | 5012 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon R9 370X avec des autres
AMDRadeon R9 370X vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 540
AMDRadeon R9 370X vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 4850
AMDRadeon R9 370X vs
AMDRadeon HD 8970M
AMDRadeon R9 370X vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2
AMDRadeon R9 370X vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960A
AMDRadeon R9 370X vs
AMDRadeon Pro 560X
