AMD Radeon Vega 8 Efficient versus ATI Radeon HD 5770
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon Vega 8 Efficient and ATI Radeon HD 5770 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, 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, Geekbench - OpenCL.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon Vega 8 Efficient
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 8 ans 6 mois plus tard
- Environ 29% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1100 MHz versus 850 MHz
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 40 nm
- 3.1x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 35 Watt versus 108 Watt
- Environ 41% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1894 versus 1343
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 355 versus 332
- 2.8x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 26.039 versus 9.373
- Environ 84% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.666 versus 0.906
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 27.603 versus 27.022
- 2.8x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 135.437 versus 48.793
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3170 versus 2673
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3352 versus 2799
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3170 versus 2673
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3352 versus 2799
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 23 April 2018 versus 13 October 2009 |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1100 MHz versus 850 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 40 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt versus 108 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1894 versus 1343 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 355 versus 332 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 26.039 versus 9.373 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.666 versus 0.906 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 27.603 versus 27.022 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 135.437 versus 48.793 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3170 versus 2673 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3352 versus 2799 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3170 versus 2673 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3352 versus 2799 |
Raisons pour considerer le ATI Radeon HD 5770
- 2.8x plus de vitesse du noyau: 850 MHz versus 300 MHz
- 2.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 459.025 versus 176.928
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2636 versus 2408
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2636 versus 2408
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 850 MHz versus 300 MHz |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 459.025 versus 176.928 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2636 versus 2408 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2636 versus 2408 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Vega 8 Efficient
GPU 2: ATI Radeon HD 5770
| 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 Vega 8 Efficient | ATI Radeon HD 5770 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1894 | 1343 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 355 | 332 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 26.039 | 9.373 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 176.928 | 459.025 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.666 | 0.906 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 27.603 | 27.022 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 135.437 | 48.793 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2408 | 2636 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3170 | 2673 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3352 | 2799 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2408 | 2636 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3170 | 2673 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3352 | 2799 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 862 | 0 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 10495 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon Vega 8 Efficient | ATI Radeon HD 5770 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | TeraScale 2 |
| Nom de code | Raven | Juniper |
| Date de sortie | 23 April 2018 | 13 October 2009 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 973 | 1093 |
| Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
| Conception | ATI Radeon HD 5000 Series | |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $159 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1100 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 300 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt | 108 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 4,940 million | 1,040 million |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,360.0 gflops | |
| Pipelines | 800 | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 34.0 GTexel / s | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | IGP | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 1x 6-pin |
| Longeur | 208 mm | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 11 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 1 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 76.8 GB / s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4800 MHz | |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon Vega 8 Efficient avec des autres
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Efficient vs
NVIDIAQuadro4 980 XGL
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Efficient vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 3000
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Efficient vs
ATIFireGL T2-128
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Efficient vs
NVIDIATesla K20c
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Efficient vs
NVIDIAGRID K2
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Efficient vs
NVIDIAQuadro K620
