Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4 versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M 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 Xe Graphics G4
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 5 ans 5 mois plus tard
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 52.80 GTexel/s versus 47.04 GTexel / s
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 10 nm versus 28 nm
- 5x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 15 Watt versus 75 Watt
- Environ 56% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 383 versus 245
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 11991 versus 10985
- Environ 47% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 79.859 versus 54.294
- Environ 43% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1137.615 versus 795.325
- Environ 24% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 4.569 versus 3.692
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 61.688 versus 51.794
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 192.566 versus 174.513
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5609 versus 5264
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5609 versus 5264
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 2 Sep 2020 versus 13 March 2015 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 52.80 GTexel/s versus 47.04 GTexel / s |
| Processus de fabrication | 10 nm versus 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt versus 75 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 383 versus 245 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 11991 versus 10985 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 79.859 versus 54.294 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1137.615 versus 795.325 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.569 versus 3.692 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 61.688 versus 51.794 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 192.566 versus 174.513 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5609 versus 5264 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5609 versus 5264 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
- 3.7x plus de vitesse du noyau: 1096 MHz versus 300 MHz
- Environ 7% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1176 MHz versus 1100 MHz
- Environ 67% de pipelines plus haut: 640 versus 384
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3366 versus 2666
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1096 MHz versus 300 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1176 MHz versus 1100 MHz |
| Pipelines | 640 versus 384 |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3366 versus 2666 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 versus 3708 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 3356 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 versus 3708 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 3356 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
| 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 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2666 | 3366 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 383 | 245 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 11991 | 10985 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 79.859 | 54.294 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1137.615 | 795.325 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.569 | 3.692 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 61.688 | 51.794 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 192.566 | 174.513 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5609 | 5264 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3708 | 3714 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 | 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5609 | 5264 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3708 | 3714 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 | 3358 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1231 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Generation 12.0 | Maxwell |
| Nom de code | Tiger Lake GT1 | GM107 |
| Date de sortie | 2 Sep 2020 | 13 March 2015 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 594 | 735 |
| Genre | Laptop | Laptop |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1100 MHz | 1176 MHz |
| Unités de Compute | 48 | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 300 MHz | 1096 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 10 nm | 28 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 | 640 |
| Pixel fill rate | 13.20 GPixel/s | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 52.80 GTexel/s | 47.04 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Noyaux CUDA | 640 | |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,505 gflops | |
| Compte de transistor | 1,870 million | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
| Soutien de DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) | 1 | |
| HDMI | ||
| Soutien de l’écran analog VGA | 1 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Largeur | IGP | |
| Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenCL | 2.1 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 80 GB / s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 2500 MHz | |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| Adaptive VSync | ||
| Ansel | ||
| BatteryBoost | ||
| CUDA | ||
| DSR | ||
| GameStream | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
| Optimus | ||
| SLI | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer Intel Iris Xe Graphics G4 avec des autres
IntelIris Xe Graphics G4 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 555 OEM
IntelIris Xe Graphics G4 vs
AMDRadeon HD 7550M
IntelIris Xe Graphics G4 vs
AMDRadeon HD 7970M
IntelIris Xe Graphics G4 vs
NVIDIANVS 810
IntelIris Xe Graphics G4 vs
AMDRadeon Pro WX 4100
IntelIris Xe Graphics G4 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 (Notebook)
