Intel HD Graphics 4000 versus AMD Radeon HD 6570
Comparaison des cartes vidéo Intel HD Graphics 4000 and AMD Radeon HD 6570 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 Intel HD Graphics 4000
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 3 mois plus tard
- Environ 62% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1050 MHz versus 650 MHz
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 22 nm versus 40 nm
- 2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 8.712 versus 4.278
- 2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.931 versus 0.464
- Environ 43% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1492 versus 1044
- Environ 43% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1492 versus 1044
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 14 May 2012 versus 7 February 2011 |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1050 MHz versus 650 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 22 nm versus 40 nm |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 8.712 versus 4.278 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.931 versus 0.464 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1492 versus 1044 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1492 versus 1044 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon HD 6570
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 15.6 GTexel / s versus 4.2 GTexel / s
- 30x plus de pipelines: 480 versus 16
- 18.6x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 624.0 gflops versus 33.6 gflops
- Environ 13% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 40 Watt versus 45 Watt
- Environ 61% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 559 versus 347
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 218 versus 194
- 2.9x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 1561 versus 538
- Environ 64% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 255.525 versus 155.638
- Environ 85% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 13.633 versus 7.36
- 4.9x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 59.183 versus 12.009
- Environ 72% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1296 versus 754
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2716 versus 2392
- Environ 72% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1296 versus 754
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2716 versus 2392
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 15.6 GTexel / s versus 4.2 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 480 versus 16 |
| Performance á point flottant | 624.0 gflops versus 33.6 gflops |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 40 Watt versus 45 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 559 versus 347 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 218 versus 194 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 1561 versus 538 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 255.525 versus 155.638 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 13.633 versus 7.36 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 59.183 versus 12.009 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1296 versus 754 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2716 versus 2392 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1296 versus 754 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2716 versus 2392 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 4000
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 6570
| 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 | Intel HD Graphics 4000 | AMD Radeon HD 6570 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 347 | 559 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 194 | 218 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 538 | 1561 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 8.712 | 4.278 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 155.638 | 255.525 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.931 | 0.464 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 7.36 | 13.633 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 12.009 | 59.183 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 754 | 1296 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1492 | 1044 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2392 | 2716 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 754 | 1296 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1492 | 1044 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2392 | 2716 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 | 846 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| Intel HD Graphics 4000 | AMD Radeon HD 6570 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Generation 7.0 | TeraScale 2 |
| Nom de code | Ivy Bridge GT2 | Thames |
| Date de sortie | 14 May 2012 | 7 February 2011 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1501 | 1426 |
| Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
| Conception | AMD Radeon HD 6000 Series | |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $79 | |
| Prix maintenant | $49.99 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 19.92 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1050 MHz | 650 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 650 MHz | |
| Performance á point flottant | 33.6 gflops | 624.0 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 22 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 16 | 480 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 4.2 GTexel / s | 15.6 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt | 40 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,200 million | 716 million |
| Stream Processors | 480 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 1.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 2.1 x16 | |
| Longeur | 168 mm | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 11.1 (11_0) | 11 |
| OpenGL | 4.0 | 4.4 |
Mémoire |
||
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 / 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Mémoire partagé | 1 | |
| RAM maximale | 1 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 28.8 GB/s | |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 900 MHz | |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer Intel HD Graphics 4000 avec des autres
IntelHD Graphics 4000 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 550M
IntelHD Graphics 4000 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 540M
IntelHD Graphics 4000 vs
NVIDIAQuadro 3000M
IntelHD Graphics 4000 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 620M
IntelHD Graphics 4000 vs
AMDRadeon HD 7480D
IntelHD Graphics 4000 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 660M Mac Edition
