NVIDIA GeForce 820M versus NVIDIA Quadro K1100M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce 820M and NVIDIA Quadro K1100M 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 GeForce 820M
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 7 mois plus tard
- Environ 15% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 810 MHz versus 706 MHz
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.686 versus 0.642
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 14.257 versus 11.732
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 22.768 versus 16.3
- Environ 68% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1447 versus 861
- 2.3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3349 versus 1443
- Environ 68% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1447 versus 861
- 2.3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3349 versus 1443
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 21 March 2015 versus 23 July 2013 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 810 MHz versus 706 MHz |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.686 versus 0.642 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 14.257 versus 11.732 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 22.768 versus 16.3 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1447 versus 861 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3349 versus 1443 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1447 versus 861 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3349 versus 1443 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro K1100M
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 22.59 GTexel / s versus 10 GTexel / s
- 4x plus de pipelines: 384 versus 96
- 2.3x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 542.2 gflops versus 240.0 gflops
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 2 GB versus 1 GB
- Environ 55% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 2800 MHz versus 1802 MHz
- 2.2x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1088 versus 490
- 2.2x meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 253 versus 114
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 3074 versus 2789
- Environ 11% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 8.649 versus 7.765
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 174.555 versus 161.305
- Environ 58% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1892 versus 1195
- Environ 58% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1892 versus 1195
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 22.59 GTexel / s versus 10 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 384 versus 96 |
| Performance á point flottant | 542.2 gflops versus 240.0 gflops |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 2 GB versus 1 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 2800 MHz versus 1802 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1088 versus 490 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 253 versus 114 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3074 versus 2789 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 8.649 versus 7.765 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 174.555 versus 161.305 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1892 versus 1195 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1892 versus 1195 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 820M
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K1100M
| 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 GeForce 820M | NVIDIA Quadro K1100M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 490 | 1088 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 114 | 253 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 2789 | 3074 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 7.765 | 8.649 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 161.305 | 174.555 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.686 | 0.642 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 14.257 | 11.732 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 22.768 | 16.3 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1195 | 1892 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1447 | 861 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3349 | 1443 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1195 | 1892 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1447 | 861 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3349 | 1443 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 847 | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce 820M | NVIDIA Quadro K1100M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Kepler | Kepler |
| Nom de code | GK107 | GK107 |
| Date de sortie | 21 March 2015 | 23 July 2013 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1444 | 1447 |
| Genre | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $109.94 | |
| Prix maintenant | $79 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 17.59 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse du noyau | 810 MHz | 706 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 240.0 gflops | 542.2 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 96 | 384 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 10 GTexel / s | 22.59 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt | 45 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,270 million | 1,270 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
| Display Port | 1.2 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Soutien de bus | PCI Express 2.0 | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-A (3.0) |
| Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 5 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 14.4 GB / s | 44.8 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1802 MHz | 2800 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | DDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
| CUDA | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| Optimus | ||
| Verde Drivers | ||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView Display Management | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce 820M avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce 820M vs
NVIDIAGeForce 8300
NVIDIAGeForce 820M vs
NVIDIAQuadro NVS 450
NVIDIAGeForce 820M vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 435M
NVIDIAGeForce 820M vs
NVIDIAQuadro K1100M
NVIDIAGeForce 820M vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 750M Mac Edition
NVIDIAGeForce 820M vs
AMDRadeon R5 M230
