Intel HD Graphics 615 versus NVIDIA GeForce GT 710
Comparaison des cartes vidéo Intel HD Graphics 615 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 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 ans 5 mois plus tard
- Environ 65% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 25.2 GTexel / s versus 15.26 GTexel / s
- Environ 10% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 403.2 gflops versus 366.3 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 28 nm
- 3.8x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 5 Watt versus 19 Watt
- 8x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 16 GB versus 2 GB
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 708 versus 627
- Environ 56% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 3041 versus 1947
- Environ 86% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 12.486 versus 6.705
- 2.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 215.572 versus 100.391
- 2.8x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.238 versus 0.441
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 11.311 versus 8.146
- Environ 15% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1128 versus 977
- Environ 31% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2409 versus 1833
- Environ 15% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1128 versus 977
- Environ 31% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2409 versus 1833
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 30 August 2016 versus 27 March 2014 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 25.2 GTexel / s versus 15.26 GTexel / s |
Performance á point flottant | 403.2 gflops versus 366.3 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 5 Watt versus 19 Watt |
Taille de mémore maximale | 16 GB versus 2 GB |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 708 versus 627 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3041 versus 1947 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 12.486 versus 6.705 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 215.572 versus 100.391 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.238 versus 0.441 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 11.311 versus 8.146 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1128 versus 977 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2409 versus 1833 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1128 versus 977 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2409 versus 1833 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GT 710
- 3.2x plus de vitesse du noyau: 954 MHz versus 300 MHz
- 8x plus de pipelines: 192 versus 24
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 212 versus 186
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 20.64 versus 18.292
- Environ 32% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1494 versus 1128
- Environ 32% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1494 versus 1128
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 954 MHz versus 300 MHz |
Pipelines | 192 versus 24 |
Référence | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 212 versus 186 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 20.64 versus 18.292 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1494 versus 1128 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1494 versus 1128 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 615
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 710
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 615 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 708 | 627 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 186 | 212 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3041 | 1947 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 12.486 | 6.705 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 215.572 | 100.391 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.238 | 0.441 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 11.311 | 8.146 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 18.292 | 20.64 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1128 | 977 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1128 | 1494 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2409 | 1833 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1128 | 977 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1128 | 1494 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2409 | 1833 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 | 192 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
Intel HD Graphics 615 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Generation 9.5 | Kepler 2.0 |
Nom de code | Kaby Lake GT2 | GK208B |
Date de sortie | 30 August 2016 | 27 March 2014 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1483 | 1486 |
Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $34.99 | |
Prix maintenant | $34.99 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 23.15 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1050 MHz | |
Vitesse du noyau | 300 MHz | 954 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 403.2 gflops | 366.3 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 24 | 192 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 25.2 GTexel / s | 15.26 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 5 Watt | 19 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 189 million | 292 million |
Noyaux CUDA | 192 | |
Température maximale du GPU | 95 °C | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | Dual Link DVI-DHDMIVGA, 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
Contribution d’audio pour HDMI | Internal | |
HDCP | ||
HDMI | ||
Résolution VGA maximale | 2048x1536 | |
Soutien de plusiers moniteurs | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 2.0 x8 |
Soutien de bus | PCI Express 2.0 | |
Hauteur | 2.713" (6.9 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 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 16 GB | 2 GB |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 / 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
Genre de mémoire | DDR3L / LPDDR3 | DDR3 |
Mémoire partagé | 1 | |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 14.4 GB / s | |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1.8 GB/s | |
Technologies |
||
Quick Sync | ||
3D Vision | ||
Adaptive VSync | ||
CUDA | ||
FXAA | ||
PhysX | ||
PureVideo |