Intel HD Graphics 4000 versus NVIDIA GeForce GT 430
Comparaison des cartes vidéo Intel HD Graphics 4000 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 430 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 7 mois plus tard
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 22 nm versus 40 nm
- Environ 9% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 45 Watt versus 49 Watt
- 2.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 8.712 versus 3.396
- Environ 79% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 155.638 versus 87.094
- 3.8x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.931 versus 0.243
- Environ 47% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 7.36 versus 5.005
- 3.2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 12.009 versus 3.764
- Environ 47% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2392 versus 1624
- Environ 47% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2392 versus 1624
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 14 May 2012 versus 11 October 2010 |
Processus de fabrication | 22 nm versus 40 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt versus 49 Watt |
Référence | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 8.712 versus 3.396 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 155.638 versus 87.094 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.931 versus 0.243 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 7.36 versus 5.005 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 12.009 versus 3.764 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2392 versus 1624 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2392 versus 1624 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GT 430
- 2.2x plus de vitesse du noyau: 1400 MHz versus 650 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 11.2 billion / sec versus 4.2 GTexel / s
- 6x plus de pipelines: 96 versus 16
- 8x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 268.8 gflops versus 33.6 gflops
- Environ 74% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 603 versus 347
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 204 versus 194
- 4.1x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 2228 versus 538
- Environ 43% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1080 versus 754
- Environ 15% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1713 versus 1492
- Environ 43% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1080 versus 754
- Environ 15% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1713 versus 1492
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 1400 MHz versus 650 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 11.2 billion / sec versus 4.2 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 96 versus 16 |
Performance á point flottant | 268.8 gflops versus 33.6 gflops |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 603 versus 347 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 204 versus 194 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 2228 versus 538 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1080 versus 754 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1713 versus 1492 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1080 versus 754 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1713 versus 1492 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 4000
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 430
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 GT 430 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 347 | 603 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 194 | 204 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 538 | 2228 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 8.712 | 3.396 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 155.638 | 87.094 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.931 | 0.243 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 7.36 | 5.005 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 12.009 | 3.764 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 754 | 1080 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1492 | 1713 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2392 | 1624 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 754 | 1080 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1492 | 1713 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2392 | 1624 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
Intel HD Graphics 4000 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 430 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Generation 7.0 | Fermi |
Nom de code | Ivy Bridge GT2 | GF108 |
Date de sortie | 14 May 2012 | 11 October 2010 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1500 | 1502 |
Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $79 | |
Prix maintenant | $35.99 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 20.89 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1050 MHz | |
Vitesse du noyau | 650 MHz | 1400 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 33.6 gflops | 268.8 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 22 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 16 | 96 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 4.2 GTexel / s | 11.2 billion / sec |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt | 49 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 1,200 million | 585 million |
Noyaux CUDA par GPU | 96 | |
Température maximale du GPU | 98 °C | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA, HDMIVGA (optional)Mini HDMIDual Link DVI |
Contribution d’audio pour HDMI | Internal | |
HDMI | ||
Résolution VGA maximale | 2048x1536 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 1.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Soutien de bus | PCI-E 2.0 x 16 | |
Hauteur | 2.713" (6.9 cm) | |
Longeur | 5.7" (14.5 cm) | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 11.1 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.0 | 4.2 |
Mémoire |
||
Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 / 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Mémoire partagé | 1 | |
RAM maximale | 1 GB | |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 25.6 - 28.8 GB / s | |
Vitesse de mémoire | 800 - 900 MHz (1600 - 1800 data rate) | |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR3 | |
Technologies |
||
Quick Sync | ||
3D Vision | ||
CUDA |