NVIDIA GeForce 840M versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce 840M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 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 840M
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 6 mois plus tard
- Environ 5% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1029 MHz versus 980 MHz
- Environ 9% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1124 MHz versus 1033 MHz
- 4.2x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 33 Watt versus 140 Watt
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 4 GB versus 2 GB
- 333.7x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 2002 MHz versus 6.0 GB/s
- Environ 52% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 95.545 versus 62.69
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 12 March 2014 versus 6 September 2012 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1029 MHz versus 980 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1124 MHz versus 1033 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 33 Watt versus 140 Watt |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 4 GB versus 2 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 2002 MHz versus 6.0 GB/s |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 95.545 versus 62.69 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 78.4 billion / sec versus 17.98 GTexel / s
- 2.5x plus de pipelines: 960 versus 384
- 2.3x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,981 gflops versus 863.2 gflops
- 3.7x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 4017 versus 1096
- 3.2x meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 487 versus 151
- Environ 97% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 11364 versus 5771
- Environ 34% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 30.505 versus 22.848
- 4.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 705.293 versus 162.594
- 2.5x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.085 versus 1.237
- Environ 67% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 35.416 versus 21.15
- Environ 72% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3581 versus 2085
- Environ 35% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3690 versus 2736
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3365 versus 3191
- Environ 72% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3581 versus 2085
- Environ 35% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3690 versus 2736
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3365 versus 3191
- 2.6x meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1307 versus 503
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 78.4 billion / sec versus 17.98 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 960 versus 384 |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,981 gflops versus 863.2 gflops |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4017 versus 1096 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 487 versus 151 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 11364 versus 5771 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 30.505 versus 22.848 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 705.293 versus 162.594 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.085 versus 1.237 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 35.416 versus 21.15 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3581 versus 2085 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3690 versus 2736 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3365 versus 3191 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3581 versus 2085 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3690 versus 2736 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3365 versus 3191 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1307 versus 503 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 840M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660
| 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 |
|
|
| Nom | NVIDIA GeForce 840M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1096 | 4017 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 151 | 487 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5771 | 11364 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 22.848 | 30.505 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 162.594 | 705.293 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.237 | 3.085 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 21.15 | 35.416 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 95.545 | 62.69 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2085 | 3581 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2736 | 3690 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3191 | 3365 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2085 | 3581 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2736 | 3690 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3191 | 3365 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 503 | 1307 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce 840M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | Kepler |
| Nom de code | GM108 | GK106 |
| Date de sortie | 12 March 2014 | 6 September 2012 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1235 | 740 |
| Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $229 | |
| Prix maintenant | $349.99 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 14.35 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1124 MHz | 1033 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1029 MHz | 980 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 863.2 gflops | 1,981 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | 960 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 17.98 GTexel / s | 78.4 billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 33 Watt | 140 Watt |
| Noyaux CUDA | 960 | |
| Compte de transistor | 2,540 million | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI..., 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| Contribution d’audio pour HDMI | Internal | |
| Soutien de G-SYNC | ||
| HDCP | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Résolution VGA maximale | 2048x1536 | |
| Soutien de plusiers moniteurs | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Soutien de bus | PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0 | PCI Express 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
| Hauteur | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
| Longeur | 9.5" (24.1 cm) | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | One 6-pin | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.3 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 2 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 16.02 GB / s | 144.2 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 Bit | 192-bit GDDR5 |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 2002 MHz | 6.0 GB/s |
| Genre de mémoire | DDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| CUDA | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| Optimus | ||
| 3D Blu-Ray | ||
| 3D Gaming | ||
| 3D Vision | ||
| Adaptive VSync | ||
| FXAA | ||
| SLI | ||
| TXAA | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce 840M avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce 840M vs
AMDRadeon HD 6370M
NVIDIAGeForce 840M vs
AMDRadeon HD 6550D
NVIDIAGeForce 840M vs
AMDRadeon R7 240
NVIDIAGeForce 840M vs
IntelUHD Graphics 630
NVIDIAGeForce 840M vs
IntelUHD Graphics 617
NVIDIAGeForce 840M vs
AMDRadeon 680M
