ATI FirePro V4800 versus ATI Radeon HD 5770
Comparaison des cartes vidéo ATI FirePro V4800 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, 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 ATI FirePro V4800
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 6 mois plus tard
- Environ 57% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 69 Watt versus 108 Watt
- Environ 37% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 456 versus 333
- Environ 16% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 56.777 versus 48.793
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3326 versus 2799
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3326 versus 2799
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 26 April 2010 versus 13 October 2009 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 69 Watt versus 108 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 456 versus 333 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 56.777 versus 48.793 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3326 versus 2799 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3326 versus 2799 |
Raisons pour considerer le ATI Radeon HD 5770
- Environ 10% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 850 MHz versus 775 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 34.0 GTexel / s versus 15.5 GTexel / s
- 2x plus de pipelines: 800 versus 400
- 2.2x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,360.0 gflops versus 620.0 gflops
- Environ 33% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 4800 MHz versus 3600 MHz
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1343 versus 1204
- 6.3x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 10495 versus 1670
- Environ 59% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 9.373 versus 5.886
- Environ 43% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 459.025 versus 321.782
- Environ 71% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.906 versus 0.529
- Environ 91% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 27.022 versus 14.184
- Environ 74% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2636 versus 1512
- Environ 21% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2673 versus 2211
- Environ 74% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2636 versus 1512
- Environ 21% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2673 versus 2211
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 850 MHz versus 775 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 34.0 GTexel / s versus 15.5 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 800 versus 400 |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,360.0 gflops versus 620.0 gflops |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4800 MHz versus 3600 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1343 versus 1204 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 10495 versus 1670 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 9.373 versus 5.886 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 459.025 versus 321.782 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.906 versus 0.529 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 27.022 versus 14.184 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2636 versus 1512 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2673 versus 2211 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2636 versus 1512 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2673 versus 2211 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: ATI FirePro V4800
GPU 2: ATI Radeon HD 5770
| 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 | ATI FirePro V4800 | ATI Radeon HD 5770 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1204 | 1343 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 456 | 333 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 1670 | 10495 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 5.886 | 9.373 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 321.782 | 459.025 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.529 | 0.906 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 14.184 | 27.022 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 56.777 | 48.793 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1512 | 2636 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2211 | 2673 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3326 | 2799 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1512 | 2636 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2211 | 2673 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3326 | 2799 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| ATI FirePro V4800 | ATI Radeon HD 5770 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 | TeraScale 2 |
| Nom de code | Redwood | Juniper |
| Date de sortie | 26 April 2010 | 13 October 2009 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $189 | $159 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1092 | 1093 |
| Genre | Workstation | Desktop |
| Conception | ATI Radeon HD 5000 Series | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse du noyau | 775 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 620.0 gflops | 1,360.0 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 40 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 400 | 800 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 15.5 GTexel / s | 34.0 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 69 Watt | 108 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 627 million | 1,040 million |
| Vitesse augmenté | 850 MHz | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 168 mm | 208 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 1x 6-pin |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 11 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.4 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 1 GB | 1 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 57.6 GB / s | 76.8 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 3600 MHz | 4800 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer ATI FirePro V4800 avec des autres
ATIFirePro V4800 vs
ATIRadeon 9600
ATIFirePro V4800 vs
NVIDIAGeForce FX 5500
ATIFirePro V4800 vs
ATIRadeon HD 5770
ATIFirePro V4800 vs
AMDFirePro V5900
ATIFirePro V4800 vs
NVIDIATesla M2050
ATIFirePro V4800 vs
AMDRadeon R7 250
