Intel UHD Graphics 615 versus Intel HD Graphics 4400
Comparaison des cartes vidéo Intel UHD Graphics 615 and Intel HD Graphics 4400 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 UHD Graphics 615
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 5 ans 2 mois plus tard
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 25.2 GTexel/s versus 4.6 GTexel / s
- Environ 20% de pipelines plus haut: 24 versus 20
- 8.8x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 403.2 gflops versus 46 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 22 nm
- 4x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 5 Watt versus 20 Watt
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 730 versus 523
- Environ 51% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 3229 versus 2144
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 18.422 versus 7.844
- Environ 43% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 221.42 versus 154.696
- Environ 33% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.277 versus 0.958
- Environ 35% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 12.269 versus 9.084
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 18.909 versus 8.335
- Environ 54% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1256 versus 817
- Environ 25% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1720 versus 1381
- Environ 54% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1256 versus 817
- Environ 25% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1720 versus 1381
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 7 November 2018 versus 3 September 2013 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 25.2 GTexel/s versus 4.6 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 24 versus 20 |
| Performance á point flottant | 403.2 gflops versus 46 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 22 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 5 Watt versus 20 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 730 versus 523 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3229 versus 2144 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 18.422 versus 7.844 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 221.42 versus 154.696 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.277 versus 0.958 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 12.269 versus 9.084 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 18.909 versus 8.335 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1256 versus 817 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1720 versus 1381 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1256 versus 817 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1720 versus 1381 |
Raisons pour considerer le Intel HD Graphics 4400
- Environ 17% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 350 MHz versus 300 MHz
- Environ 10% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1150 MHz versus 1050 MHz
- Environ 54% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 277 versus 180
- Environ 72% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3044 versus 1772
- Environ 72% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3044 versus 1772
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 350 MHz versus 300 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1150 MHz versus 1050 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 277 versus 180 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3044 versus 1772 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3044 versus 1772 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: Intel UHD Graphics 615
GPU 2: Intel HD Graphics 4400
| 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 | Intel HD Graphics 4400 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 730 | 523 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 180 | 277 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3229 | 2144 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 18.422 | 7.844 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 221.42 | 154.696 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.277 | 0.958 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 12.269 | 9.084 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 18.909 | 8.335 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1256 | 817 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1720 | 1381 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1772 | 3044 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1256 | 817 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1720 | 1381 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1772 | 3044 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 152 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| Intel UHD Graphics 615 | Intel HD Graphics 4400 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Generation 9.5 | Generation 7.5 |
| Nom de code | Kaby Lake GT2 | Haswell GT2 |
| Date de sortie | 7 November 2018 | 3 September 2013 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1411 | 1413 |
| Genre | Laptop | Laptop |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1050 MHz | 1150 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 300 MHz | 350 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 403.2 gflops | 46 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 22 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 | 20 |
| Pixel fill rate | 3.150 GPixel/s | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 25.2 GTexel/s | 4.6 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 5 Watt | 20 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 189 million | 392 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (11_1) |
| OpenCL | 2.1 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.3 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 16 GB | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 / 128 Bit | 64 / 128 Bit |
| Genre de mémoire | DDR3L / LPDDR3 | |
| Mémoire partagé | Yes | 1 |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer Intel UHD Graphics 615 avec des autres
IntelUHD Graphics 615 vs
ATIRadeon 7200
IntelUHD Graphics 615 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 9600 GSO
IntelUHD Graphics 615 vs
AMDRadeon HD 8550G
IntelUHD Graphics 615 vs
IntelHD Graphics 4400
IntelUHD Graphics 615 vs
AMDRadeon R6 Graphics
IntelUHD Graphics 615 vs
AMDRadeon Vega 7
