Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) versus AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200
Comparaison des cartes vidéo Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) and AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Soutien API, Mémoire, Technologies, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences. Analyse du performance de référence des cartes vidéo: GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 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).
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU)
- Environ 2% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1100 MHz versus 1082 MHz
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 10 nm versus 14 nm
- 2.6x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 25 Watt versus 65 Watt
- Environ 49% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3751 versus 2524
- Environ 49% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3751 versus 2524
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3714 versus 3274
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3714 versus 3274
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1100 MHz versus 1082 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 10 nm versus 14 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 25 Watt versus 65 Watt |
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3751 versus 2524 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3751 versus 2524 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 versus 3274 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 versus 3274 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 versus 3352 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 versus 3352 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200
- 3.1x plus de vitesse du noyau: 925 MHz versus 300 MHz
| Vitesse du noyau | 925 MHz versus 300 MHz |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU)
GPU 2: AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Nom | Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) | AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 |
|---|---|---|
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3751 | 2524 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3751 | 2524 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 | 3274 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 | 3274 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 | 3352 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 | 3352 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2428 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 444 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 14535 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 25.896 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 486.804 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.503 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 53.111 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 100.658 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) | AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Intel Gen. 11 (Ice Lake) | Polaris |
| Nom de code | Ice Lake G7 Gen. 11 | Lexa |
| Date de sortie | 28 May 2019 | 27 May 2019 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 670 | 813 |
| Genre | Laptop | Workstation |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $199 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1100 MHz | 1082 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 300 MHz | 925 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 10 nm | 14 nm |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 2.25 TFLOPS | 1,385 GFLOPS |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 1.12 TFLOPS | 1,385 GFLOPS |
| Pipelines | 64 | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 25 Watt | 65 Watt |
| Unités de Compute | 10 | |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 86.56 GFLOPS | |
| Pixel fill rate | 17.31 GPixel/s | |
| Stream Processors | 640 | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 34.62 GTexel/s | |
| Compte de transistor | 2200 million | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 4x mini-DisplayPort | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| Genre de mémoire | DDR4 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | Yes | |
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 96 GB/s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4000 MHz | |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
| Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Hauteur | Half Height | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | |
| Longeur | 6.6" (168 mm) | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer Intel Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) avec des autres
IntelIris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) vs
ATIRadeon X1550
IntelIris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) vs
NVIDIAGeForce 7150 + nForce 630i
IntelIris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) vs
AMDRadeon HD 7610M
IntelIris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) vs
NVIDIAQuadro M600M
IntelIris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) vs
AMDRadeon R7 430 OEM
IntelIris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU) vs
AMDRadeon Pro 455
