Intel HD Graphics 615 versus AMD Radeon R7 Graphics
Comparaison des cartes vidéo Intel HD Graphics 615 and AMD Radeon R7 Graphics 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 615
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 mois plus tard
- Environ 50% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 300 MHz versus 200 MHz
- Environ 39% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1050 MHz versus 758 MHz
- Environ 53% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 25.2 GTexel / s versus 16.46 GTexel / s
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 28 nm
- 3x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 5 Watt versus 15 Watt
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 215.572 versus 201.006
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.238 versus 1.227
- 33.7x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1128 versus 33.5
- 33.3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1128 versus 33.9
- 40.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2409 versus 60
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 30 August 2016 versus 31 May 2016 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 300 MHz versus 200 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1050 MHz versus 758 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 25.2 GTexel / s versus 16.46 GTexel / s |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 5 Watt versus 15 Watt |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 215.572 versus 201.006 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.238 versus 1.227 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1128 versus 33.5 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1128 versus 33.9 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2409 versus 60 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R7 Graphics
- 16x plus de pipelines: 384 versus 24
- Environ 31% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 526.8 gflops versus 403.2 gflops
- 7.4x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 22612 versus 3055
- Environ 23% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 15.32 versus 12.486
- 2.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 24.26 versus 11.311
- 4.7x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 85.46 versus 18.292
- Environ 75% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1979 versus 1128
- Environ 86% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2101 versus 1128
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 versus 2409
| Caractéristiques | |
| Pipelines | 384 versus 24 |
| Performance á point flottant | 526.8 gflops versus 403.2 gflops |
| Référence | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 22612 versus 3055 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 15.32 versus 12.486 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 24.26 versus 11.311 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 85.46 versus 18.292 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1979 versus 1128 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2101 versus 1128 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 2409 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 615
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 Graphics
| 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 615 | AMD Radeon R7 Graphics |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 714 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 187 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3055 | 22612 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 12.486 | 15.32 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 215.572 | 201.006 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.238 | 1.227 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 11.311 | 24.26 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 18.292 | 85.46 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1128 | 1979 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1128 | 2101 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2409 | 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1128 | 33.5 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1128 | 33.9 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2409 | 60 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 | 1457 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| Intel HD Graphics 615 | AMD Radeon R7 Graphics | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Generation 9.5 | GCN 3.0 |
| Nom de code | Kaby Lake GT2 | Wani |
| Date de sortie | 30 August 2016 | 31 May 2016 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1481 | 1466 |
| Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1050 MHz | 758 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 300 MHz | 200 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 403.2 gflops | 526.8 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 24 | 384 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 25.2 GTexel / s | 16.46 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 5 Watt | 15 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 189 million | 2,410 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | IGP |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (12_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 16 GB | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 / 128 Bit | |
| Genre de mémoire | DDR3L / LPDDR3 | System Shared |
| Mémoire partagé | 1 | |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer Intel HD Graphics 615 avec des autres
IntelHD Graphics 615 vs
ATIRadeon IGP 345M
IntelHD Graphics 615 vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 4000
IntelHD Graphics 615 vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 4500
IntelHD Graphics 615 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 710
IntelHD Graphics 615 vs
AMDRadeon R7 M260
IntelHD Graphics 615 vs
IntelHD Graphics 5500
