Intel HD Graphics 520 versus NVIDIA GeForce 910M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo Intel HD Graphics 520 and NVIDIA GeForce 910M 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 520
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 28 nm
- 2.2x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 15 Watt versus 33 Watt
- Environ 47% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 864 versus 588
- Environ 85% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 209 versus 113
- Environ 52% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 3993 versus 2629
- 3.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 21.852 versus 6.448
- 2.2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.243 versus 0.574
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 12.958 versus 12.2
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 28.182 versus 27.733
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3337 versus 3020
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3337 versus 3020
| Caractéristiques | |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt versus 33 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 864 versus 588 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 209 versus 113 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3993 versus 2629 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 21.852 versus 6.448 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.243 versus 0.574 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 12.958 versus 12.2 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 28.182 versus 27.733 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3337 versus 3020 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3337 versus 3020 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce 910M
- 2.6x plus de vitesse du noyau: 775 MHz versus 300 MHz
- 16x plus de pipelines: 384 versus 24
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 155.993 versus 143.083
- Environ 41% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1344 versus 951
- Environ 77% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2590 versus 1462
- Environ 41% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1344 versus 951
- Environ 77% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2590 versus 1462
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 775 MHz versus 300 MHz |
| Pipelines | 384 versus 24 |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 155.993 versus 143.083 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1344 versus 951 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2590 versus 1462 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1344 versus 951 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2590 versus 1462 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 520
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 910M
| 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 520 | NVIDIA GeForce 910M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 864 | 588 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 209 | 113 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3993 | 2629 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 21.852 | 6.448 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 143.083 | 155.993 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.243 | 0.574 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 12.958 | 12.2 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 28.182 | 27.733 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 951 | 1344 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1462 | 2590 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3337 | 3020 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 951 | 1344 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1462 | 2590 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3337 | 3020 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 326 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| Intel HD Graphics 520 | NVIDIA GeForce 910M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Generation 9.0 | Fermi 2.0 |
| Nom de code | Skylake GT2 | GF117 |
| Date de sortie | 1 September 2015 | 18 August 2015 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1381 | 1382 |
| Genre | Laptop | Laptop |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1050 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 300 MHz | 775 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 24 | 384 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 33 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 189 million | 585 million |
| Performance á point flottant | 297.6 gflops | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 12.4 GTexel / s | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 32 GB | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 / 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Genre de mémoire | DDR3L / LPDDR3 / DDR4 | DDR3 |
| Mémoire partagé | 1 | 0 |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 14.4 GB / s | |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1800 MHz | |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
| CUDA | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| Optimus | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer Intel HD Graphics 520 avec des autres
IntelHD Graphics 520 vs
ATIMobility Radeon 7500
IntelHD Graphics 520 vs
IntelHD Graphics
IntelHD Graphics 520 vs
AMDRadeon R7 M340
IntelHD Graphics 520 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 910M
IntelHD Graphics 520 vs
IntelUHD Graphics 620
IntelHD Graphics 520 vs
AMDRadeon HD 8370D IGP
