Intel UHD Graphics 615 versus AMD Radeon R6 Graphics
Comparaison des cartes vidéo Intel UHD Graphics 615 and AMD Radeon R6 Graphics 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 UHD Graphics 615
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 4 ans 1 mois plus tard
- Environ 75% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1050 MHz versus 600 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 25.2 GTexel/s versus 15.72 GTexel / s
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 28 nm
- 3x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 5 Watt versus 15 Watt
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 734 versus 618
- Environ 31% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 182 versus 139
- Environ 64% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 18.422 versus 11.201
- Environ 36% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.277 versus 0.942
- Environ 46% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1256 versus 860
- Environ 46% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1256 versus 860
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 7 November 2018 versus 17 September 2014 |
Vitesse augmenté | 1050 MHz versus 600 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 25.2 GTexel/s versus 15.72 GTexel / s |
Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 5 Watt versus 15 Watt |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 734 versus 618 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 182 versus 139 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 18.422 versus 11.201 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.277 versus 0.942 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1256 versus 860 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1256 versus 860 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R6 Graphics
- Environ 78% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 533 MHz versus 300 MHz
- 16x plus de pipelines: 384 versus 24
- Environ 25% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 503.0 gflops versus 403.2 gflops
- Environ 27% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 4077 versus 3220
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 224.132 versus 221.42
- Environ 57% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 19.267 versus 12.269
- 2.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 45.165 versus 18.909
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1784 versus 1720
- Environ 80% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3182 versus 1772
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1784 versus 1720
- Environ 80% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3182 versus 1772
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 533 MHz versus 300 MHz |
Pipelines | 384 versus 24 |
Performance á point flottant | 503.0 gflops versus 403.2 gflops |
Référence | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 4077 versus 3220 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 224.132 versus 221.42 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 19.267 versus 12.269 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 45.165 versus 18.909 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1784 versus 1720 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3182 versus 1772 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1784 versus 1720 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3182 versus 1772 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: Intel UHD Graphics 615
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R6 Graphics
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 UHD Graphics 615 | AMD Radeon R6 Graphics |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 734 | 618 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 182 | 139 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3220 | 4077 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 18.422 | 11.201 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 221.42 | 224.132 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.277 | 0.942 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 12.269 | 19.267 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 18.909 | 45.165 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1256 | 860 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1720 | 1784 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1772 | 3182 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1256 | 860 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1720 | 1784 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1772 | 3182 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
Intel UHD Graphics 615 | AMD Radeon R6 Graphics | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Generation 9.5 | GCN 2.0 |
Nom de code | Kaby Lake GT2 | Spectre |
Date de sortie | 7 November 2018 | 17 September 2014 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1411 | 1412 |
Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1050 MHz | 600 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 300 MHz | 533 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 403.2 gflops | 503.0 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 100.8 GFLOPS | |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 806.4 GFLOPS | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 403.2 GFLOPS | |
Pipelines | 24 | 384 |
Pixel fill rate | 3.150 GPixel/s | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 25.2 GTexel/s | 15.72 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 5 Watt | 15 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 189 million | 2,410 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | IGP |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (12_0) |
OpenCL | 2.1 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 16 GB | |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 / 128 Bit | |
Genre de mémoire | DDR3L / LPDDR3 | System Shared |
Mémoire partagé | Yes | |
Technologies |
||
Quick Sync |