Intel HD Graphics 4000 versus NVIDIA GeForce 610M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo Intel HD Graphics 4000 and NVIDIA GeForce 610M 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 5 mois plus tard
- Environ 17% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1050 MHz versus 900 MHz
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 22 nm versus 40 nm
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 347 versus 292
- Environ 72% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 194 versus 113
- 3.2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 8.712 versus 2.747
- Environ 49% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 155.638 versus 104.498
- 3.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.931 versus 0.27
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 7.36 versus 5.832
- Environ 24% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 12.009 versus 9.69
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 754 versus 664
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 754 versus 664
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 14 May 2012 versus 1 December 2011 |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1050 MHz versus 900 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 22 nm versus 40 nm |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 347 versus 292 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 194 versus 113 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 8.712 versus 2.747 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 155.638 versus 104.498 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.931 versus 0.27 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 7.36 versus 5.832 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 12.009 versus 9.69 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 754 versus 664 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 754 versus 664 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce 610M
- Environ 3% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 672 MHz versus 650 MHz
- 3x plus de pipelines: 48 versus 16
- 3.8x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 129.02 gflops versus 33.6 gflops
- 3.8x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 12 Watt versus 45 Watt
- 2.6x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 1396 versus 538
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1602 versus 1492
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2848 versus 2392
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1602 versus 1492
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2848 versus 2392
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 672 MHz versus 650 MHz |
| Pipelines | 48 versus 16 |
| Performance á point flottant | 129.02 gflops versus 33.6 gflops |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 12 Watt versus 45 Watt |
| Référence | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 1396 versus 538 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1602 versus 1492 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2848 versus 2392 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1602 versus 1492 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2848 versus 2392 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 4000
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 610M
| 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 | NVIDIA GeForce 610M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 347 | 292 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 194 | 113 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 538 | 1396 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 8.712 | 2.747 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 155.638 | 104.498 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.931 | 0.27 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 7.36 | 5.832 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 12.009 | 9.69 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 754 | 664 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1492 | 1602 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2392 | 2848 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 754 | 664 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1492 | 1602 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2392 | 2848 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| Intel HD Graphics 4000 | NVIDIA GeForce 610M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Generation 7.0 | Fermi |
| Nom de code | Ivy Bridge GT2 | GF108 |
| Date de sortie | 14 May 2012 | 1 December 2011 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1501 | 1535 |
| Genre | Laptop | Laptop |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1050 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 650 MHz | 672 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 33.6 gflops | 129.02 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 22 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 16 | 48 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 4.2 GTexel / s | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt | 12 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,200 million | 585 million |
| Noyaux CUDA | 48 | |
| Décodeurs de vidéo | H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
| HDMI | ||
| Résolution VGA maximale | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 1.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Soutien de bus | PCI Express 2.0 | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 11.1 (11_0) | 12 API |
| OpenGL | 4.0 | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Mémoire |
||
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 / 128 Bit | 64bit |
| Mémoire partagé | 1 | 0 |
| RAM maximale | 1 GB | |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1600 MHz | |
| Genre de mémoire | DDR3 | |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
| CUDA | ||
| Optimus | ||
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
