NVIDIA GRID K520 versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GRID K520 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M 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 NVIDIA GRID K520
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 mois plus tard
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 2x 102.0 GTexel / s billion / sec versus 102.0 GTexel / s
- 2x plus de pipelines: 2x 1536 versus 1536
- 2x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2x 2,448 gflops versus 2,448 gflops
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 2x 4 GB versus 4 GB
- 2x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 5000 MHz versus 2500 MHz
- Environ 51% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1063.784 versus 705.616
- 3.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 42.277 versus 13.832
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6782 versus 4868
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3713 versus 3679
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6782 versus 4868
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3713 versus 3679
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 23 July 2013 versus 11 May 2013 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 2x 102.0 GTexel / s billion / sec versus 102.0 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 2x 1536 versus 1536 |
Performance á point flottant | 2x 2,448 gflops versus 2,448 gflops |
Taille de mémore maximale | 2x 4 GB versus 4 GB |
Vitesse de mémoire | 5000 MHz versus 2500 MHz |
Référence | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1063.784 versus 705.616 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 42.277 versus 13.832 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6782 versus 4868 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3713 versus 3679 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3354 versus 3351 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6782 versus 4868 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3713 versus 3679 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3354 versus 3351 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M
- Environ 10% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 823 MHz versus 745 MHz
- Environ 84% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 122 Watt versus 225 Watt
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3835 versus 3516
- 2.7x meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 424 versus 160
- Environ 18% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 12824 versus 10864
- Environ 90% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 39.934 versus 20.97
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.631 versus 3.244
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 78.867 versus 76.158
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 823 MHz versus 745 MHz |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 122 Watt versus 225 Watt |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3835 versus 3516 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 424 versus 160 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 12824 versus 10864 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 39.934 versus 20.97 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.631 versus 3.244 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 78.867 versus 76.158 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GRID K520
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M
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 K520 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3516 | 3835 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 160 | 424 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 10864 | 12824 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 20.97 | 39.934 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1063.784 | 705.616 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.244 | 3.631 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 42.277 | 13.832 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 76.158 | 78.867 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6782 | 4868 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3713 | 3679 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3354 | 3351 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6782 | 4868 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3713 | 3679 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3354 | 3351 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1466 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA GRID K520 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Kepler | Kepler |
Nom de code | GK104 | GK104 |
Date de sortie | 23 July 2013 | 11 May 2013 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $3,599 | |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 763 | 765 |
Genre | Workstation | Laptop |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse du noyau | 745 MHz | 823 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 2x 2,448 gflops | 2,448 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 2x 1536 | 1536 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 2x 102.0 GTexel / s billion / sec | 102.0 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 225 Watt | 122 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 3,540 million | 3,540 million |
Vitesse augmenté | 797 MHz | |
Noyaux CUDA | 1536 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Audio HD reseau 7.1 sur HDMI | ||
Soutien de DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) | Up to 3840x2160 | |
Soutien du signal sDP 1.2 | Up to 3840x2160 | |
Protection du contenu HDCP | ||
HDMI | ||
Support du signale LVDS | Up to 1920x1200 | |
Bitstreaming d’audio TrueHD et DTS-HD | ||
Soutien de l’écran analog VGA | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
Longeur | 267 mm | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 8-pin | None |
Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0, PCI Express 2.0 | |
Taille du laptop | large | |
Options SLI | 1 | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12 API |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 2x 4 GB | 4 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 2x 160.0 GB / s | 160.0 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 2x 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 5000 MHz | 2500 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Configuration standard de la mémoire | GDDR5 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
Blu-Ray 3D Support | ||
CUDA | ||
Direct Compute | ||
FXAA | ||
GPU Boost | ||
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
Optimus | ||
TXAA |