NVIDIA GRID K2 versus NVIDIA Quadro K2000D
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GRID K2 and NVIDIA Quadro K2000D 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).
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GRID K2
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 mois plus tard
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 2x 95.36 GTexel / s billion / sec versus 30.53 GTexel / s
- 8x plus de pipelines: 2x 1536 versus 384
- 6.2x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2x 2,289 gflops versus 732.7 gflops
- 4x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 2x 4 GB versus 2 GB
- Environ 25% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 5000 MHz versus 4000 MHz
- Environ 73% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 2737 versus 1586
- 2.7x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 10550 versus 3973
- Environ 33% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 18.948 versus 14.283
- 2.5x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 968.568 versus 386.006
- 2.5x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.58 versus 1.018
- 2.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 32.988 versus 15.605
- 3.7x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 114.144 versus 31.155
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6371 versus 2646
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6371 versus 2646
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 11 May 2013 versus 1 March 2013 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 2x 95.36 GTexel / s billion / sec versus 30.53 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 2x 1536 versus 384 |
Performance á point flottant | 2x 2,289 gflops versus 732.7 gflops |
Taille de mémore maximale | 2x 4 GB versus 2 GB |
Vitesse de mémoire | 5000 MHz versus 4000 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2737 versus 1586 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 10550 versus 3973 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 18.948 versus 14.283 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 968.568 versus 386.006 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.58 versus 1.018 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 32.988 versus 15.605 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 114.144 versus 31.155 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6371 versus 2646 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6371 versus 2646 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro K2000D
- Environ 28% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 954 MHz versus 745 MHz
- 4.4x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 51 Watt versus 225 Watt
- Environ 27% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 406 versus 319
- 10.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3493 versus 344
- 10.7x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3339 versus 312
- 10.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3493 versus 344
- 10.7x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3339 versus 312
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 954 MHz versus 745 MHz |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 51 Watt versus 225 Watt |
Référence | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 406 versus 319 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3493 versus 344 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3339 versus 312 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3493 versus 344 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3339 versus 312 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GRID K2
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K2000D
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 | NVIDIA GRID K2 | NVIDIA Quadro K2000D |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2737 | 1586 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 319 | 406 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 10550 | 3973 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 18.948 | 14.283 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 968.568 | 386.006 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.58 | 1.018 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 32.988 | 15.605 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 114.144 | 31.155 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6371 | 2646 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 344 | 3493 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 312 | 3339 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6371 | 2646 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 344 | 3493 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 312 | 3339 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA GRID K2 | NVIDIA Quadro K2000D | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Kepler | Kepler |
Nom de code | GK104 | GK107 |
Date de sortie | 11 May 2013 | 1 March 2013 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $5,199 | $599 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 975 | 977 |
Genre | Workstation | Workstation |
Prix maintenant | $464 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 4.14 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse du noyau | 745 MHz | 954 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 2x 2,289 gflops | 732.7 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 2x 1536 | 384 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 2x 95.36 GTexel / s billion / sec | 30.53 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 225 Watt | 51 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 3,540 million | 1,270 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x mini-DisplayPort |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Longeur | 267 mm | 202 mm |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 8-pin | None |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 2x 4 GB | 2 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 2x 160.0 GB / s | 64 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 2x 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 5000 MHz | 4000 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |