Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640 versus NVIDIA Quadro 6000
Comparaison des cartes vidéo Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640 and NVIDIA Quadro 6000 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 Iris Plus Graphics 640
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 6 ans 0 mois plus tard
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 40 nm
- 13.6x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 15 Watt versus 204 Watt
- 5.3x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 32 GB versus 6 GB
- Environ 50% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 36.485 versus 24.377
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 3 January 2017 versus 10 December 2010 |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 40 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt versus 204 Watt |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 32 GB versus 6 GB |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 36.485 versus 24.377 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro 6000
- Environ 91% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 574 MHz versus 300 MHz
- 9.3x plus de pipelines: 448 versus 48
- 2x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 2707 versus 1346
- Environ 33% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 451 versus 340
- Environ 54% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 9891 versus 6440
- 3.2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 793.755 versus 246.614
- Environ 41% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.66 versus 1.888
- Environ 66% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 34.891 versus 21.014
- 2.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 90.839 versus 42.981
- Environ 52% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3501 versus 2306
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3689 versus 1514
- Environ 52% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3501 versus 2306
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3689 versus 1514
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 574 MHz versus 300 MHz |
| Pipelines | 448 versus 48 |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2707 versus 1346 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 451 versus 340 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 9891 versus 6440 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 793.755 versus 246.614 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.66 versus 1.888 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 34.891 versus 21.014 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 90.839 versus 42.981 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3501 versus 2306 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3689 versus 1514 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3335 versus 3333 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3501 versus 2306 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3689 versus 1514 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3335 versus 3333 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro 6000
| 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 Iris Plus Graphics 640 | NVIDIA Quadro 6000 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1346 | 2707 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 340 | 451 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 6440 | 9891 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 36.485 | 24.377 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 246.614 | 793.755 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.888 | 2.66 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 21.014 | 34.891 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 42.981 | 90.839 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2306 | 3501 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1514 | 3689 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3333 | 3335 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2306 | 3501 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1514 | 3689 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3333 | 3335 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 720 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640 | NVIDIA Quadro 6000 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Generation 9.5 | Fermi |
| Nom de code | Kaby Lake GT3e | GF100 |
| Date de sortie | 3 January 2017 | 10 December 2010 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1159 | 774 |
| Genre | Laptop | Workstation |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $4,399 | |
| Prix maintenant | $332.21 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 12.86 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1100 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 300 MHz | 574 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 48 | 448 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 204 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 189 million | 3,100 million |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,027.7 gflops | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 32.1 GTexel / s | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x S-Video |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 248 mm | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 32 GB | 6 GB |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 / 128 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Genre de mémoire | DDR3L / LPDDR3 / DDR4 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 1 | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 143.4 GB / s | |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 2988 MHz | |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640 avec des autres
IntelIris Plus Graphics 640 vs
NVIDIAQuadro2 MXR
IntelIris Plus Graphics 640 vs
NVIDIAGeForce3 Ti200
IntelIris Plus Graphics 640 vs
NVIDIAGeForce4 MX 440
IntelIris Plus Graphics 640 vs
AMDRadeon HD 8670M
IntelIris Plus Graphics 640 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 675MX Mac Edition
IntelIris Plus Graphics 640 vs
AMDRadeon R7 A360
