AMD Radeon RX 5700 versus AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon RX 5700 and AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 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 5700
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 10 mois plus tard
- Environ 22% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1465 MHz versus 1200 MHz
- Environ 13% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1725 MHz versus 1530 MHz
- Environ 28% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 180 Watt versus 230 Watt
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 14501 versus 13932
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 889 versus 815
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 209.509 versus 171.616
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 21.941 versus 16.925
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 250 versus 247.788
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 7 July 2019 versus 13 August 2018 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1465 MHz versus 1200 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1725 MHz versus 1530 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 180 Watt versus 230 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 14501 versus 13932 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 889 versus 815 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 209.509 versus 171.616 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 21.941 versus 16.925 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 250 versus 247.788 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 69812 versus 66231
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 4031.404 versus 3686.851
- Environ 15% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 1195.863 versus 1036.448
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 13044 versus 11536
- Environ 92% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 7164 versus 3723
- 9.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 30936 versus 3366
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 13044 versus 11536
- Environ 92% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 7164 versus 3723
- 9.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 30936 versus 3366
| Référence | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 69812 versus 66231 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 4031.404 versus 3686.851 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1195.863 versus 1036.448 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 13044 versus 11536 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 7164 versus 3723 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 30936 versus 3366 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 13044 versus 11536 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 7164 versus 3723 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 30936 versus 3366 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon RX 5700
GPU 2: AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200
| 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 5700 | AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 14501 | 13932 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 889 | 815 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 66231 | 69812 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 209.509 | 171.616 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3686.851 | 4031.404 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 21.941 | 16.925 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 250 | 247.788 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1036.448 | 1195.863 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 11536 | 13044 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3723 | 7164 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3366 | 30936 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 11536 | 13044 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3723 | 7164 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3366 | 30936 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 8499 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon RX 5700 | AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | RDNA | GCN 5.0 |
| Nom de code | Navi 10 | Vega 10 |
| Date de sortie | 7 July 2019 | 13 August 2018 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $350 | $999 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 177 | 118 |
| Genre | Desktop | Workstation |
| Prix maintenant | $999 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 13.37 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1725 MHz | 1530 MHz |
| Unités de Compute | 36 | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1465 MHz | 1200 MHz |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 15.9 TFLOPs | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 7.95 TFLOPs | |
| Pixel fill rate | 110.4 GP/s | |
| Render output units | 64 | |
| Stream Processors | 2304 | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 248.4 GT/s | |
| Texture Units | 144 | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 180 Watt | 230 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 10.3 B | 12,500 million |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 4x mini-DisplayPort | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Énergie du systeme recommandé (PSU) | 600 Watt | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1 x 8-pin and 1x6 pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
| Longeur | 267 mm | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (12_1) |
| Vulkan | ||
| OpenGL | 4.6 | |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 8 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 448 GB/s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 256 bit | |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 2000 MHz | |
Technologies |
||
| 4K H264 Decode | ||
| 4K H264 Encode | ||
| DisplayPort 1.3 HBR / 1.4 HDR Ready | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| H265/HEVC Decode | ||
| H265/HEVC Encode | ||
| HDMI 4K Support | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Virtual Super Resolution (VSR) | ||
| VR Ready | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon RX 5700 avec des autres
AMDRadeon RX 5700 vs
AMDRadeon R9 295X2
AMDRadeon RX 5700 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q
AMDRadeon RX 5700 vs
NVIDIAGeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q
AMDRadeon RX 5700 vs
NVIDIAQuadro RTX 5000 Mobile
AMDRadeon RX 5700 vs
IntelArc A730M
AMDRadeon RX 5700 vs
AppleM1 Ultra 48-core
