AMD Radeon R9 380 versus AMD FirePro S9050
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R9 380 and AMD FirePro S9050 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), 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, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 380
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 10 mois plus tard
- Environ 8% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 108.6 GTexel / s versus 100.8 GTexel / s
- Environ 8% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 3,476 gflops versus 3,226 gflops
- Environ 18% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 190 Watt versus 225 Watt
- Environ 24% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 6081 versus 4901
- Environ 77% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 653 versus 369
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1503.633 versus 1463.376
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 7635 versus 7062
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 7635 versus 7062
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 18 June 2015 versus 7 August 2014 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 108.6 GTexel / s versus 100.8 GTexel / s |
| Performance á point flottant | 3,476 gflops versus 3,226 gflops |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 190 Watt versus 225 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6081 versus 4901 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 653 versus 369 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1503.633 versus 1463.376 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7635 versus 7062 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7635 versus 7062 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD FirePro S9050
- 3x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 12 GB versus 4 GB
- 5.7x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 5500 MHz versus 970 MHz
- Environ 18% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 68.324 versus 58.135
- Environ 68% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 6260 versus 3718
- 3.9x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 13032 versus 3359
- Environ 68% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 6260 versus 3718
- 3.9x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 13032 versus 3359
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 12 GB versus 4 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5500 MHz versus 970 MHz |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 68.324 versus 58.135 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 6260 versus 3718 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 13032 versus 3359 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 6260 versus 3718 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 13032 versus 3359 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 380
GPU 2: AMD FirePro S9050
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (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 380 | AMD FirePro S9050 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6081 | 4901 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 653 | 369 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 76397 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 58.135 | 68.324 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1503.633 | 1463.376 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7635 | 7062 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3718 | 6260 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3359 | 13032 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7635 | 7062 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3718 | 6260 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3359 | 13032 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2791 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.491 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 91.133 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 344.551 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon R9 380 | AMD FirePro S9050 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Nom de code | Antigua | Tahiti |
| Conception | AMD Radeon R9 300 Series | |
| Date de sortie | 18 June 2015 | 7 August 2014 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $199 | |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 370 | 366 |
| Prix maintenant | $264.99 | |
| Genre | Desktop | Workstation |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 31.71 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 970 MHz | |
| Unités de Compute | 28 | |
| Performance á point flottant | 3,476 gflops | 3,226 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 1792 | 1792 |
| Stream Processors | 1792 | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 108.6 GTexel / s | 100.8 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 190 Watt | 225 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 5,000 million | 4,313 million |
| Vitesse du noyau | 900 MHz | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 1x DisplayPort |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Nombre d’écrans Eyefinity | 6 | |
| VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Bridgeless CrossFire | ||
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Facteur de forme | Full Height / Full Length Dual Slot | Full Height / Full Length |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 221 mm | 254 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 2 x 6-pin | 1x 8-pin |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (11_1) |
| Mantle | ||
| OpenCL | 2.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| Mémoire de la bande passante haute (HBM) | ||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 12 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 182.4 GB/s | 264 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 256 bit | 384 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 970 MHz | 5500 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| DDMA audio | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| FRTC | ||
| HD3D | ||
| HDMI 4K Support | ||
| LiquidVR | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
| Virtual Super Resolution (VSR) | ||
| ZeroCore | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon R9 380 avec des autres
AMDRadeon R9 380 vs
ATIRadeon HD 4810
AMDRadeon R9 380 vs
AMDRadeon R9 280X
AMDRadeon R9 380 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 970
AMDRadeon R9 380 vs
AMDRadeon Pro Vega 16
AMDRadeon R9 380 vs
AMDRadeon RX 5500M
AMDRadeon R9 380 vs
AMDRadeon Pro 5300M
