AMD Radeon RX 550 versus AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon RX 550 and AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 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 RX 550
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 5 mois plus tard
- Environ 17% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 7000 MHz versus 6000 MHz
- Environ 25% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1037.305 versus 830.773
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 18 April 2017 versus 10 November 2016 |
Vitesse de mémoire | 7000 MHz versus 6000 MHz |
Référence | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1037.305 versus 830.773 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100
- Environ 2% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1125 MHz versus 1100 MHz
- Environ 2% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1201 MHz versus 1183 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 76.86 GTexel / s versus 37.86 GTexel / s
- 2x plus de pipelines: 1024 versus 512
- 2050x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2,460 gflops versus 1.2 TFLOPs
- Environ 37% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3676 versus 2690
- Environ 33% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 634 versus 476
- Environ 52% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 17696 versus 11610
- Environ 64% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 55.077 versus 33.507
- Environ 35% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 4.132 versus 3.064
- Environ 57% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 82.584 versus 52.533
- Environ 60% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 225.985 versus 140.911
- Environ 21% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5431 versus 4485
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1123 versus 940
- Environ 24% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2678 versus 2158
- Environ 21% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5431 versus 4485
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1123 versus 940
- Environ 24% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2678 versus 2158
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 1125 MHz versus 1100 MHz |
Vitesse augmenté | 1201 MHz versus 1183 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 76.86 GTexel / s versus 37.86 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 1024 versus 512 |
Performance á point flottant | 2,460 gflops versus 1.2 TFLOPs |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3676 versus 2690 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 634 versus 476 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 17696 versus 11610 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 55.077 versus 33.507 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.132 versus 3.064 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 82.584 versus 52.533 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 225.985 versus 140.911 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5431 versus 4485 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1123 versus 940 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2678 versus 2158 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5431 versus 4485 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1123 versus 940 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2678 versus 2158 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon RX 550
GPU 2: AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100
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 RX 550 | AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2690 | 3676 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 476 | 634 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 11610 | 17696 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 33.507 | 55.077 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1037.305 | 830.773 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.064 | 4.132 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 52.533 | 82.584 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 140.911 | 225.985 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4485 | 5431 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 940 | 1123 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2158 | 2678 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4485 | 5431 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 940 | 1123 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2158 | 2678 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 127 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
AMD Radeon RX 550 | AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | GCN 4.0 | GCN 4.0 |
Nom de code | Lexa | Baffin |
Conception | Radeon RX 500 Series | |
Génération GCN | 4th Gen | |
Date de sortie | 18 April 2017 | 10 November 2016 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $79 | $399 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 876 | 596 |
Prix maintenant | $75 | $259.99 |
Genre | Desktop | Workstation |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 59.51 | 19.63 |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1183 MHz | 1201 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 1100 MHz | 1125 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 1.2 TFLOPs | 2,460 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 14 nm |
Pipelines | 512 | 1024 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 37.86 GTexel / s | 76.86 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 50 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 2,200 million | 3,000 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 4x mini-DisplayPort |
Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
HDMI | ||
VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
Longeur | 145 mm | |
Énergie du systeme recommandé (PSU) | 400 Watt | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (12_0) |
OpenCL | 2.0 | |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 4 GB | 4 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 112 GB/s | 96 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | 128 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 7000 MHz | 6000 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
4K H264 Decode | ||
4K H264 Encode | ||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
AMD Radeon™ Chill | ||
AMD Radeon™ ReLive | ||
AppAcceleration | ||
FreeSync | ||
H265/HEVC Decode | ||
H265/HEVC Encode | ||
HDMI 4K Support | ||
LiquidVR | ||
PowerTune | ||
TrueAudio | ||
Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
Virtual Super Resolution (VSR) |