AMD Radeon R9 390 versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R9 390 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 390
- Environ 33% plus de taille maximale de mémoire: 8 GB versus 6 GB
- 142.9x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 1000 MHz versus 7.0 GB/s
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 43795 versus 42847
- Environ 84% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 3164.164 versus 1722.98
- 3.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 116.473 versus 37.16
Caractéristiques | |
Taille de mémore maximale | 8 GB versus 6 GB |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1000 MHz versus 7.0 GB/s |
Référence | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 43795 versus 42847 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3164.164 versus 1722.98 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 116.473 versus 37.16 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3708 versus 3695 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 versus 3338 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3708 versus 3695 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 versus 3338 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti
- Environ 8% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1075 MHz versus 1000 MHz
- Environ 10% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 176 billion / sec versus 160.0 GTexel / s
- Environ 10% de pipelines plus haut: 2816 versus 2560
- Environ 18% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 6,060 gflops versus 5,120 gflops
- Environ 10% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 250 Watt versus 275 Watt
- Environ 55% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 13809 versus 8910
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 852 versus 797
- Environ 21% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 145.843 versus 120.267
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 11.661 versus 11.097
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 788.464 versus 607.381
- Environ 46% meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 5754 versus 3949
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse augmenté | 1075 MHz versus 1000 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 176 billion / sec versus 160.0 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 2816 versus 2560 |
Performance á point flottant | 6,060 gflops versus 5,120 gflops |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 250 Watt versus 275 Watt |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 13809 versus 8910 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 852 versus 797 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 145.843 versus 120.267 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 11.661 versus 11.097 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 788.464 versus 607.381 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10471 versus 10445 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10471 versus 10445 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 5754 versus 3949 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 390
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti
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) |
|
|
||||
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score |
|
|
Nom | AMD Radeon R9 390 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 8910 | 13809 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 797 | 852 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 43795 | 42847 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 120.267 | 145.843 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3164.164 | 1722.98 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 11.097 | 11.661 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 116.473 | 37.16 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 607.381 | 788.464 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10445 | 10471 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3708 | 3695 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 | 3338 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10445 | 10471 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3708 | 3695 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 | 3338 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3949 | 5754 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
AMD Radeon R9 390 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | GCN 2.0 | Maxwell 2.0 |
Nom de code | Grenada | GM200 |
Conception | AMD Radeon R9 300 Series | |
Date de sortie | 18 June 2015 | 2 June 2015 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $329 | $649 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 307 | 306 |
Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
Prix maintenant | $679.99 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 23.43 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1000 MHz | 1075 MHz |
Unités de Compute | 40 | |
Performance á point flottant | 5,120 gflops | 6,060 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 2560 | 2816 |
Stream Processors | 2560 | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 160.0 GTexel / s | 176 billion / sec |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 275 Watt | 250 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 6,200 million | 8,000 million |
Vitesse du noyau | 1000 MHz | |
Noyaux CUDA | 2816 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort, Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 |
Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
Eyefinity | ||
HDMI | ||
Nombre d’écrans Eyefinity | 6 | |
VGA | ||
Contribution d’audio pour HDMI | Internal | |
Soutien de G-SYNC | ||
HDCP | ||
Résolution VGA maximale | 2048x1536 | |
Soutien de plusiers moniteurs | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Bridgeless CrossFire | ||
Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | PCI Express 3.0 |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Longeur | 275 mm | 10.5" (26.7 cm) |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1 x 6-pin, 1 x 8-pin | 6-pin + 8-pin |
Hauteur | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
Énergie du systeme recommandé (PSU) | 600 Watt | |
Options SLI | 4x | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (12_1) |
Mantle | ||
OpenCL | 2.0 | |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
Mémoire de la bande passante haute (HBM) | ||
RAM maximale | 8 GB | 6 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 384 GB/s | 336.5 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 512 bit | 384 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1000 MHz | 7.0 GB/s |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
CrossFire | ||
DDMA audio | ||
FreeSync | ||
HD3D | ||
HDMI 4K Support | ||
LiquidVR | ||
PowerTune | ||
TrueAudio | ||
Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
Virtual Super Resolution (VSR) | ||
ZeroCore | ||
3D Vision | ||
Adaptive Vertical Sync | ||
CUDA | ||
GameStream | ||
GameWorks | ||
GeForce Experience | ||
GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
GPU Boost | ||
SLI | ||
Surround |