Intel HD Graphics 520 versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750
Comparaison des cartes vidéo Intel HD Graphics 520 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 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
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 6 mois plus tard
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 28 nm
- 3.7x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 15 Watt versus 55 Watt
- 32x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 32 GB versus 1 GB
| Date de sortie | 1 September 2015 versus 18 February 2014 |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt versus 55 Watt |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 32 GB versus 1 GB |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750
- 3.4x plus de vitesse du noyau: 1020 MHz versus 300 MHz
- Environ 3% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1085 MHz versus 1050 MHz
- 21.3x plus de pipelines: 512 versus 24
- 3.9x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3337 versus 864
- 2.5x meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 515 versus 209
- 2.3x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 9306 versus 3993
- Environ 57% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 34.239 versus 21.852
- 4.5x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 639.427 versus 143.083
- Environ 88% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.341 versus 1.243
- 2.5x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 32 versus 12.958
- 2.5x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 69.814 versus 28.182
- 4.7x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4498 versus 951
- 2.5x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3704 versus 1462
- 4.7x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4498 versus 951
- 2.5x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3704 versus 1462
- 3.2x meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1050 versus 326
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1020 MHz versus 300 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1085 MHz versus 1050 MHz |
| Pipelines | 512 versus 24 |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3337 versus 864 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 515 versus 209 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 9306 versus 3993 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 34.239 versus 21.852 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 639.427 versus 143.083 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.341 versus 1.243 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 32 versus 12.958 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 69.814 versus 28.182 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4498 versus 951 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3704 versus 1462 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3346 versus 3337 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4498 versus 951 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3704 versus 1462 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3346 versus 3337 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1050 versus 326 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 520
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750
| 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 |
|
|
| Nom | Intel HD Graphics 520 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 864 | 3337 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 209 | 515 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3993 | 9306 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 21.852 | 34.239 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 143.083 | 639.427 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.243 | 2.341 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 12.958 | 32 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 28.182 | 69.814 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 951 | 4498 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1462 | 3704 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3337 | 3346 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 951 | 4498 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1462 | 3704 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3337 | 3346 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 326 | 1050 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| Intel HD Graphics 520 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Generation 9.0 | Maxwell |
| Nom de code | Skylake GT2 | GM107 |
| Date de sortie | 1 September 2015 | 18 February 2014 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1381 | 724 |
| Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $119 | |
| Prix maintenant | $150.99 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 27.54 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1050 MHz | 1085 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 300 MHz | 1020 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 24 | 512 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 55 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 189 million | 1,870 million |
| Noyaux CUDA | 512 | |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,111 gflops | |
| Température maximale du GPU | 95 °C | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 34.72 GTexel / s | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI, One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One mini... |
| Contribution d’audio pour HDMI | Internal | |
| Soutien de G-SYNC | ||
| HDCP | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Résolution VGA maximale | 2048x1536 | |
| Soutien de plusiers moniteurs | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Hauteur | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
| Longeur | 5.7" (14.5 cm) | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 32 GB | 1 GB |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 / 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Genre de mémoire | DDR3L / LPDDR3 / DDR4 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 1 | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 80 GB / s | |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5.0 GB/s | |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
| 3D Gaming | ||
| 3D Vision | ||
| 3D Vision Live | ||
| Adaptive VSync | ||
| Blu Ray 3D | ||
| CUDA | ||
| FXAA | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| TXAA | ||
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
