AMD Radeon R9 M380 versus AMD FirePro M6100
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R9 M380 and AMD FirePro M6100 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 M380
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 6 mois plus tard
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 4 GB versus 2 GB
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 2774 versus 2195
- Environ 75% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 530 versus 302
- Environ 16% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 194.051 versus 166.915
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2855 versus 2517
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2855 versus 2517
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 5 May 2015 versus 16 October 2013 |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 4 GB versus 2 GB |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2774 versus 2195 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 530 versus 302 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 194.051 versus 166.915 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2855 versus 2517 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2855 versus 2517 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD FirePro M6100
- Environ 19% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1075 MHz versus 900 MHz
- Environ 8% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 51.6 GTexel / s versus 48 GTexel / s
- Environ 7% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,651 gflops versus 1,536 gflops
- 3.7x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 5500 MHz versus 1500 MHz
- 4.1x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 52486 versus 12660
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 39.059 versus 34.701
- Environ 37% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 750.731 versus 546.907
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.395 versus 2.618
- Environ 17% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 57.283 versus 48.878
- Environ 23% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4537 versus 3688
- 3.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1803 versus 536
- Environ 23% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4537 versus 3688
- 3.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1803 versus 536
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1075 MHz versus 900 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 51.6 GTexel / s versus 48 GTexel / s |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,651 gflops versus 1,536 gflops |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5500 MHz versus 1500 MHz |
| Référence | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 52486 versus 12660 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 39.059 versus 34.701 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 750.731 versus 546.907 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.395 versus 2.618 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 57.283 versus 48.878 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4537 versus 3688 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1803 versus 536 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4537 versus 3688 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1803 versus 536 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 M380
GPU 2: AMD FirePro M6100
| 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 M380 | AMD FirePro M6100 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2774 | 2195 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 530 | 302 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 12660 | 52486 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 34.701 | 39.059 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 546.907 | 750.731 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.618 | 3.395 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 48.878 | 57.283 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 194.051 | 166.915 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3688 | 4537 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 536 | 1803 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2855 | 2517 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3688 | 4537 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 536 | 1803 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2855 | 2517 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon R9 M380 | AMD FirePro M6100 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | GCN 2.0 |
| Nom de code | Strato | Saturn |
| Conception | AMD Radeon R9 300 Series | |
| Date de sortie | 5 May 2015 | 16 October 2013 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 875 | 859 |
| Genre | Desktop | Mobile workstation |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1000 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 900 MHz | 1075 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,536 gflops | 1,651 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 768 | 768 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 48 GTexel / s | 51.6 GTexel / s |
| Compte de transistor | 2,080 million | 2,080 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
| Eyefinity | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Taille du laptop | medium sized | large |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (12_0) |
| Mantle | ||
| OpenCL | Not Listed | |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 2 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 96 GB / s | 88 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1500 MHz | 5500 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| DirectCompute 5.0 | ||
| DualGraphics | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| HD3D | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| Graphiques changeables | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| ZeroCore | ||
| AppAcceleration | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon R9 M380 avec des autres
AMDRadeon R9 M380 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 445M
AMDRadeon R9 M380 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 560
AMDRadeon R9 M380 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 650 Ti
AMDRadeon R9 M380 vs
AMDRadeon R9 M375X
AMDRadeon R9 M380 vs
AMDRadeon RX 550
AMDRadeon R9 M380 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 1030 (Desktop)
