AMD Radeon R9 M275 versus NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R9 M275 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M 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 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 M275
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 7 mois plus tard
- Environ 18% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 37 GTexel / s versus 31.36 GTexel / s
- Environ 67% de pipelines plus haut: 640 versus 384
- Environ 57% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,184 gflops versus 752.6 gflops
- Environ 75% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 569 versus 325
- Environ 87% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 9231 versus 4933
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 28.064 versus 12.449
- Environ 70% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.206 versus 1.295
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 34.381 versus 24.566
- 4.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 121.685 versus 28.025
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 28 January 2014 versus 25 June 2013 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 37 GTexel / s versus 31.36 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 640 versus 384 |
Performance á point flottant | 1,184 gflops versus 752.6 gflops |
Référence | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 569 versus 325 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 9231 versus 4933 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 28.064 versus 12.449 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.206 versus 1.295 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 34.381 versus 24.566 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 121.685 versus 28.025 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M
- Environ 9% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 980 MHz versus 900 MHz
- Environ 35% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 5400 MHz versus 4000 MHz
- Environ 52% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1695 versus 1115
- Environ 45% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 455.796 versus 313.463
- 3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3504 versus 1162
- Environ 95% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3344 versus 1717
- 3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3504 versus 1162
- Environ 95% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3344 versus 1717
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 980 MHz versus 900 MHz |
Vitesse de mémoire | 5400 MHz versus 4000 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1695 versus 1115 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 455.796 versus 313.463 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3504 versus 1162 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3344 versus 1717 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3504 versus 1162 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3344 versus 1717 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 M275
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M
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 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Nom | AMD Radeon R9 M275 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1115 | 1695 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 569 | 325 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 9231 | 4933 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 28.064 | 12.449 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 313.463 | 455.796 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.206 | 1.295 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 34.381 | 24.566 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 121.685 | 28.025 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1162 | 3504 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1717 | 3344 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1162 | 3504 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1717 | 3344 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3093 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3093 | |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2148 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
AMD Radeon R9 M275 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |
Nom de code | Venus | GK107 |
Date de sortie | 28 January 2014 | 25 June 2013 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $799.99 | |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 989 | 990 |
Prix maintenant | $699.99 | |
Genre | Laptop | Laptop |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 3.01 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 925 MHz | |
Vitesse du noyau | 900 MHz | 980 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 1,184 gflops | 752.6 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 640 | 384 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 37 GTexel / s | 31.36 GTexel / s |
Compte de transistor | 1,500 million | 1,270 million |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Audio HD reseau 7.1 sur HDMI | ||
Soutien de DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) | Up to 3840x2160 | |
Soutien du signal sDP 1.2 | Up to 3840x2160 | |
Protection du contenu HDCP | ||
HDMI | ||
Support du signale LVDS | Up to 1920x1200 | |
Bitstreaming d’audio TrueHD et DTS-HD | ||
Soutien de l’écran analog VGA | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Taille du laptop | large | medium sized |
Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0, PCI Express 2.0 | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12 API |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 2 GB | 2 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 64 GB / s | 86.4 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 4000 MHz | 5400 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | 0 |
Configuration standard de la mémoire | GDDR5 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision | ||
3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
Blu-Ray 3D Support | ||
CUDA | ||
Direct Compute | ||
FXAA | ||
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
Optimus |