NVIDIA GeForce 845M versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce 845M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M 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 - 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), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce 845M
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 3 ans 2 mois plus tard
- Environ 49% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1071 MHz versus 720 MHz
- Environ 55% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1176 MHz versus 758 MHz
- 3x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 33 Watt versus 100 Watt
- 2.8x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 5012 MHz versus 1800 MHz
- Environ 84% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2320 versus 1263
- Environ 36% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3287 versus 2409
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 versus 3111
- Environ 84% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2320 versus 1263
- Environ 36% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3287 versus 2409
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 versus 3111
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 26 August 2015 versus 4 June 2012 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1071 MHz versus 720 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1176 MHz versus 758 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 33 Watt versus 100 Watt |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz versus 1800 MHz |
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2320 versus 1263 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3287 versus 2409 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 3111 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2320 versus 1263 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3287 versus 2409 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 3111 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 80.6 billion / sec versus 27.62 GTexel / s
- 3.5x plus de pipelines: 1344 versus 384
- 2.3x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2,038 gflops versus 883.7 gflops
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 4 GB versus 2 GB
- 2.2x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3278 versus 1489
- Environ 72% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 351 versus 204
- Environ 55% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 9444 versus 6112
- 2.2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.823 versus 1.295
- Environ 79% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 40.155 versus 22.387
- Environ 31% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 99.75 versus 76.073
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 80.6 billion / sec versus 27.62 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1344 versus 384 |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,038 gflops versus 883.7 gflops |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 4 GB versus 2 GB |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3278 versus 1489 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 351 versus 204 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 9444 versus 6112 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.823 versus 1.295 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 40.155 versus 22.387 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 99.75 versus 76.073 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 845M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| 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 845M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1489 | 3278 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 204 | 351 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 6112 | 9444 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.295 | 2.823 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 22.387 | 40.155 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 76.073 | 99.75 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2320 | 1263 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3287 | 2409 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3111 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2320 | 1263 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3287 | 2409 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3111 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 28.081 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 879.575 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce 845M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | Kepler |
| Nom de code | GM108 | GK104 |
| Date de sortie | 26 August 2015 | 4 June 2012 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1015 | 1018 |
| Genre | Laptop | Laptop |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $310.50 | |
| Prix maintenant | $499.99 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 8.46 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1176 MHz | 758 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1071 MHz | 720 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 883.7 gflops | 2,038 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | 1344 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 27.62 GTexel / s | 80.6 billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 33 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,870 million | 3,540 million |
| Noyaux CUDA | 1344 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Taille du laptop | medium sized | large |
| Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Options SLI | 2-way | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12 API |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 16.02 GB / s | 115.2 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 / 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz | 1800 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | DDR3 / GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
| CUDA | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| Optimus | ||
| 3D Vision | ||
| Adaptive VSync | ||
| DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
| SLI | ||
| TXAA | ||
