NVIDIA GRID K1 versus AMD Radeon HD 7650M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GRID K1 and AMD Radeon HD 7650M pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire. 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 NVIDIA GRID K1
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 2 mois plus tard
- Environ 89% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 850 MHz versus 450 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 4x 13.6 GTexel / s billion / sec versus 10.8 GTexel / s
- Environ 60% de pipelines plus haut: 4x 192 versus 480
- 3x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 4x 326.4 gflops versus 432.0 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 28 nm versus 40 nm
- 16x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 4x 4 GB versus 1 GB
- Environ 11% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 1782 MHz versus 1600 MHz
- Environ 49% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 651 versus 437
- 4.3x meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 259 versus 60
- Environ 66% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 1976 versus 1191
- Environ 24% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 4.591 versus 3.699
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1237 versus 1042
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1237 versus 1042
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 18 March 2013 versus 7 January 2012 |
Vitesse du noyau | 850 MHz versus 450 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 4x 13.6 GTexel / s billion / sec versus 10.8 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 4x 192 versus 480 |
Performance á point flottant | 4x 326.4 gflops versus 432.0 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm versus 40 nm |
Taille de mémore maximale | 4x 4 GB versus 1 GB |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1782 MHz versus 1600 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 651 versus 437 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 259 versus 60 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 1976 versus 1191 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 4.591 versus 3.699 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1237 versus 1042 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1237 versus 1042 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon HD 7650M
- 6.5x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 20 Watt versus 130 Watt
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 220.859 versus 169.864
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.375 versus 0.336
- 4.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 44.624 versus 10.43
- 5.5x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1949 versus 354
- 5.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 1733 versus 319
- 5.5x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1949 versus 354
- 5.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 1733 versus 319
Caractéristiques | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 20 Watt versus 130 Watt |
Référence | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 220.859 versus 169.864 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.375 versus 0.336 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 44.624 versus 10.43 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1949 versus 354 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1733 versus 319 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1949 versus 354 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1733 versus 319 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GRID K1
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 7650M
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 - 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 | NVIDIA GRID K1 | AMD Radeon HD 7650M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 651 | 437 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 259 | 60 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 1976 | 1191 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 4.591 | 3.699 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 169.864 | 220.859 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.336 | 0.375 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 8.734 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 10.43 | 44.624 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1237 | 1042 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 354 | 1949 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 319 | 1733 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1237 | 1042 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 354 | 1949 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 319 | 1733 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 680 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA GRID K1 | AMD Radeon HD 7650M | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Kepler | TeraScale 2 |
Nom de code | GK107 | Thames |
Date de sortie | 18 March 2013 | 7 January 2012 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $4,140 | |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1525 | 1528 |
Genre | Workstation | Laptop |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse du noyau | 850 MHz | 450 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 4x 326.4 gflops | 432.0 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 4x 192 | 480 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 4x 13.6 GTexel / s billion / sec | 10.8 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 130 Watt | 20 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 1,270 million | 716 million |
Vitesse augmenté | 550 MHz | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Longeur | 267 mm | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 6-pin | |
Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 11.2 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 4x 4 GB | 1 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 4x 28.51 GB / s | 25.6 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 4x 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1782 MHz | 1600 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | DDR3 | DDR3 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 |