Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4 versus AMD Radeon Pro 460
Comparaison des cartes vidéo Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4 and AMD Radeon Pro 460 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).
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 3 ans 10 mois plus tard
- Environ 21% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1100 MHz versus 907 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 52.80 GTexel/s versus 58.05 GTexel / s
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 10 nm versus 14 nm
- 2.3x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 15 Watt versus 35 Watt
- Environ 81% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 79.859 versus 44.089
- Environ 91% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1138.276 versus 594.914
- Environ 33% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 4.596 versus 3.46
- Environ 11% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 61.742 versus 55.755
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5609 versus 4664
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3708 versus 1842
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5609 versus 4664
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3708 versus 1842
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 2 Sep 2020 versus 30 October 2016 |
Vitesse augmenté | 1100 MHz versus 907 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 52.80 GTexel/s versus 58.05 GTexel / s |
Processus de fabrication | 10 nm versus 14 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt versus 35 Watt |
Référence | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 79.859 versus 44.089 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1138.276 versus 594.914 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.596 versus 3.46 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 61.742 versus 55.755 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5609 versus 4664 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3708 versus 1842 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 versus 3346 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5609 versus 4664 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3708 versus 1842 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 versus 3346 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon Pro 460
- 2.8x plus de vitesse du noyau: 850 MHz versus 300 MHz
- 2.7x plus de pipelines: 1024 versus 384
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3453 versus 2687
- Environ 92% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 679 versus 354
- Environ 25% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 15221 versus 12203
- Environ 17% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 226.93 versus 193.829
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 850 MHz versus 300 MHz |
Pipelines | 1024 versus 384 |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3453 versus 2687 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 679 versus 354 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 15221 versus 12203 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 226.93 versus 193.829 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4
GPU 2: AMD Radeon Pro 460
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 Xe Graphics G4 | AMD Radeon Pro 460 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2687 | 3453 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 354 | 679 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 12203 | 15221 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 79.859 | 44.089 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1138.276 | 594.914 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.596 | 3.46 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 61.742 | 55.755 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 193.829 | 226.93 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5609 | 4664 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3708 | 1842 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 | 3346 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5609 | 4664 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3708 | 1842 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 | 3346 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4 | AMD Radeon Pro 460 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Generation 12.0 | GCN 4.0 |
Nom de code | Tiger Lake GT1 | Baffin |
Date de sortie | 2 Sep 2020 | 30 October 2016 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 621 | 629 |
Genre | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1100 MHz | 907 MHz |
Unités de Compute | 48 | |
Vitesse du noyau | 300 MHz | 850 MHz |
Processus de fabrication | 10 nm | 14 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 211.2 GFLOPS | |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 1.690 TFLOPS | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 844.8 GFLOPS | |
Pipelines | 384 | 1024 |
Pixel fill rate | 13.20 GPixel/s | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 52.80 GTexel/s | 58.05 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 35 Watt |
Performance á point flottant | 1,858 gflops | |
Compte de transistor | 3,000 million | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
Largeur | IGP | |
Taille du laptop | large | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 (12_0) |
OpenCL | 2.1 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Shader Model | 6.4 | |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 4 GB | |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 81.28 GB / s | |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | |
Vitesse de mémoire | 5080 MHz | |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
DisplayPort 1.3 HBR / 1.4 HDR Ready | ||
FreeSync | ||
HDMI 2.0 |