AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL versus AMD Radeon HD 6990
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL and AMD Radeon HD 6990 pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire. 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 M GL
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 6 ans 10 mois plus tard
- Environ 12% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 931 MHz versus 830 MHz
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 40 nm
- 5.8x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 65 Watt versus 375 Watt
- Environ 21% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3632 versus 3013
- 3.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 58.971 versus 17.264
- Environ 47% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1235.247 versus 840.452
- 2.9x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.134 versus 1.76
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 75.289 versus 53.903
- Environ 38% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6318 versus 4562
- Environ 38% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6318 versus 4562
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 1 February 2018 versus 8 March 2011 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 931 MHz versus 830 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 40 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt versus 375 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3632 versus 3013 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 58.971 versus 17.264 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1235.247 versus 840.452 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.134 versus 1.76 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 75.289 versus 53.903 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6318 versus 4562 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6318 versus 4562 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon HD 6990
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 2x 79.7 GTexel / s billion / sec versus 80.88 GTexel / s
- 2.4x plus de pipelines: 2x 1536 versus 1280
- Environ 97% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2x 2,549.8 gflops versus 2,588 gflops
- 3.6x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 5000 MHz versus 1400 MHz
- Environ 31% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 630 versus 481
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 265.302 versus 252.311
- Environ 79% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3713 versus 2070
- 2.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3356 versus 1514
- Environ 79% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3713 versus 2070
- 2.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3356 versus 1514
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 2x 79.7 GTexel / s billion / sec versus 80.88 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 2x 1536 versus 1280 |
| Performance á point flottant | 2x 2,549.8 gflops versus 2,588 gflops |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5000 MHz versus 1400 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 630 versus 481 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 265.302 versus 252.311 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3713 versus 2070 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 versus 1514 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3713 versus 2070 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 versus 1514 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 6990
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| 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 M GL | AMD Radeon HD 6990 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3632 | 3013 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 481 | 630 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 19593 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 58.971 | 17.264 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1235.247 | 840.452 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.134 | 1.76 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 75.289 | 53.903 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 252.311 | 265.302 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6318 | 4562 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2070 | 3713 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1514 | 3356 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6318 | 4562 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2070 | 3713 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1514 | 3356 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2091 | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL | AMD Radeon HD 6990 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | TeraScale 3 |
| Nom de code | Polaris 22 | Antilles |
| Date de sortie | 1 February 2018 | 8 March 2011 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 622 | 626 |
| Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $699 | |
| Prix maintenant | $159.99 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 27.81 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1011 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 931 MHz | 830 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,588 gflops | 2x 2,549.8 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 1280 | 2x 1536 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 80.88 GTexel / s | 2x 79.7 GTexel / s billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt | 375 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 2,640 million | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 1x DVI, 4x mini-DisplayPort |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | IGP | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 295 mm | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 2x 8-pin | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 11.2 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 2x 2 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 204.8 GB / s | 2x 160.0 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 1024 Bit | 2x 256 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1400 MHz | 5000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | HBM2 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon RX Vega M GL avec des autres
AMDRadeon RX Vega M GL vs
ATIRadeon X800 XT
AMDRadeon RX Vega M GL vs
ATIRadeon X800 XL
AMDRadeon RX Vega M GL vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 775M Mac Edition
AMDRadeon RX Vega M GL vs
AMDRadeon Pro 560
AMDRadeon RX Vega M GL vs
AMDRadeon RX 540 OEM
AMDRadeon RX Vega M GL vs
IntelIris Xe Graphics G4
