AMD Radeon RX Vega 10 Mobile versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon RX Vega 10 Mobile and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M 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 Vega 10 Mobile
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 3 ans 7 mois plus tard
- Environ 44% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 52 GTexel / s versus 36.08 GTexel / s
- Environ 44% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,664 gflops versus 1,155 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 28 nm
- 4.5x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 10 Watt versus 45 Watt
- Environ 66% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 374 versus 225
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 10265 versus 9694
- Environ 11% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 167.399 versus 151.016
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 26 October 2017 versus 12 March 2014 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 52 GTexel / s versus 36.08 GTexel / s |
Performance á point flottant | 1,664 gflops versus 1,155 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 Watt versus 45 Watt |
Référence | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 374 versus 225 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 10265 versus 9694 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 167.399 versus 151.016 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M
- 8x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 2 GB versus 256 MB
- Environ 54% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 2516 versus 1633
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 37.761 versus 29.977
- Environ 25% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 388.248 versus 309.874
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.428 versus 2.177
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 38.889 versus 35.847
- Environ 65% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3817 versus 2315
- Environ 17% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3685 versus 3162
- Environ 65% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3817 versus 2315
- Environ 17% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3685 versus 3162
Caractéristiques | |
Taille de mémore maximale | 2 GB versus 256 MB |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2516 versus 1633 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 37.761 versus 29.977 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 388.248 versus 309.874 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.428 versus 2.177 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 38.889 versus 35.847 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3817 versus 2315 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3685 versus 3162 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 versus 3339 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3817 versus 2315 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3685 versus 3162 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 versus 3339 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon RX Vega 10 Mobile
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M
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 Vega 10 Mobile | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1633 | 2516 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 374 | 225 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 10265 | 9694 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 29.977 | 37.761 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 309.874 | 388.248 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.177 | 2.428 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 35.847 | 38.889 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 167.399 | 151.016 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2315 | 3817 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3162 | 3685 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3339 | 3353 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2315 | 3817 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3162 | 3685 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3339 | 3353 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 979 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
AMD Radeon RX Vega 10 Mobile | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | GCN 5.0 | Maxwell |
Nom de code | Raven | GM107 |
Date de sortie | 26 October 2017 | 12 March 2014 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 940 | 941 |
Genre | Desktop | Laptop |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1300 MHz | |
Vitesse du noyau | 300 MHz | |
Performance á point flottant | 1,664 gflops | 1,155 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 640 | 640 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 52 GTexel / s | 36.08 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 Watt | 45 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 4,940 million | 1,870 million |
Noyaux CUDA | 640 | |
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 | IGP | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Soutien de bus | PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0 | |
Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 256 MB | 2 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 12.8 GB / s | 80.0 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Genre de mémoire | DDR4 | DDR3, GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Configuration standard de la mémoire | DDR3 or GDDR5 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Blu-Ray | ||
Adaptive VSync | ||
Ansel | ||
BatteryBoost | ||
CUDA | ||
Direct Compute | ||
FXAA | ||
GeForce Experience | ||
GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
GPU Boost | ||
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
Optimus | ||
SLI | ||
TXAA |