Intel HD Graphics 510 versus NVIDIA GeForce GT 620M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo Intel HD Graphics 510 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 620M 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 510
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 3 ans 0 mois plus tard
- Environ 33% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 950 MHz versus 715 MHz
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 40 nm
- 32x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 32 GB versus 1 GB
- Environ 43% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 623 versus 436
- Environ 28% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 162 versus 127
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 2381 versus 2102
- 3.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 14.381 versus 4.233
- Environ 34% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 215.873 versus 161.144
- 2.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.081 versus 0.519
- Environ 63% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 11.675 versus 7.151
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 1 September 2015 versus 23 August 2012 |
Vitesse augmenté | 950 MHz versus 715 MHz |
Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 40 nm |
Taille de mémore maximale | 32 GB versus 1 GB |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 623 versus 436 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 162 versus 127 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 2381 versus 2102 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 14.381 versus 4.233 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 215.873 versus 161.144 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.081 versus 0.519 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 11.675 versus 7.151 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GT 620M
- 8x plus de pipelines: 96 versus 12
- Environ 39% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 253.4 gflops versus 182.4 gflops
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 16.605 versus 15.094
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1032 versus 902
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1595 versus 1333
- Environ 34% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2392 versus 1786
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1032 versus 902
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1595 versus 1333
- Environ 34% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2392 versus 1786
Caractéristiques | |
Pipelines | 96 versus 12 |
Performance á point flottant | 253.4 gflops versus 182.4 gflops |
Référence | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 16.605 versus 15.094 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1032 versus 902 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1595 versus 1333 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2392 versus 1786 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1032 versus 902 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1595 versus 1333 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2392 versus 1786 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 510
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 620M
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 510 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 620M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 623 | 436 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 162 | 127 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 2381 | 2102 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 14.381 | 4.233 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 215.873 | 161.144 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.081 | 0.519 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 11.675 | 7.151 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 15.094 | 16.605 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 902 | 1032 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1333 | 1595 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1786 | 2392 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 902 | 1032 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1333 | 1595 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1786 | 2392 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
Intel HD Graphics 510 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 620M | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Generation 9.0 | Fermi |
Nom de code | Skylake GT1 | GF108 |
Date de sortie | 1 September 2015 | 23 August 2012 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1502 | 1505 |
Genre | Laptop | Laptop |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 950 MHz | 715 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 300 MHz | |
Performance á point flottant | 182.4 gflops | 253.4 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 12 | 96 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 11.4 GTexel / s | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 15 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 189 million | 585 million |
Noyaux CUDA | 96 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
HDCP | ||
HDMI | ||
Résolution VGA maximale | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Soutien de bus | PCI Express 2.0 | |
Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12 API |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 32 GB | 1 GB |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 / 128 Bit | |
Genre de mémoire | LPDDR3 / DDR4 | DDR3 |
Mémoire partagé | 1 | 0 |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1800 MHz | |
Technologies |
||
Quick Sync | ||
3D Blu-Ray | ||
CUDA | ||
DirectCompute | ||
DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
Optimus | ||
Verde Drivers |