NVIDIA GeForce 940MX versus AMD Radeon R7 250
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce 940MX and AMD Radeon R7 250 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 940MX
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 8 mois plus tard
- Environ 6% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 23.83 GTexel / s versus 22.4 GTexel / s
- Environ 6% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 762.6 gflops versus 716.8 gflops
- 3.3x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 23 Watt versus 75 Watt
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 4 GB versus 2 GB
- 4.4x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 5012 MHz versus 1150 MHz
- Environ 43% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1518 versus 1058
- Environ 43% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 28.91 versus 20.161
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 312.94 versus 304.279
- Environ 11% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.83 versus 1.655
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 103.937 versus 96.934
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2486 versus 2179
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3587 versus 3170
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2486 versus 2179
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3587 versus 3170
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 28 June 2016 versus 8 October 2013 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 23.83 GTexel / s versus 22.4 GTexel / s |
| Performance á point flottant | 762.6 gflops versus 716.8 gflops |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 23 Watt versus 75 Watt |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 4 GB versus 2 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz versus 1150 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1518 versus 1058 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 28.91 versus 20.161 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 312.94 versus 304.279 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.83 versus 1.655 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 103.937 versus 96.934 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2486 versus 2179 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3587 versus 3170 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 versus 3356 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2486 versus 2179 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3587 versus 3170 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 versus 3356 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R7 250
- Environ 6% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1050 MHz versus 993 MHz
- Environ 65% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 284 versus 172
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 7533 versus 6327
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 30.046 versus 27.833
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1050 MHz versus 993 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 284 versus 172 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 7533 versus 6327 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 30.046 versus 27.833 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 940MX
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 250
| 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 940MX | AMD Radeon R7 250 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1518 | 1058 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 172 | 284 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 6327 | 7533 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 28.91 | 20.161 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 312.94 | 304.279 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.83 | 1.655 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 27.833 | 30.046 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 103.937 | 96.934 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2486 | 2179 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3587 | 3170 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 | 3356 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2486 | 2179 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3587 | 3170 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 | 3356 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 585 | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce 940MX | AMD Radeon R7 250 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | GCN 1.0 |
| Nom de code | GM108 | Oland |
| Date de sortie | 28 June 2016 | 8 October 2013 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1105 | 1107 |
| Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
| Conception | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series | |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $89 | |
| Prix maintenant | $78.34 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 27.62 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 993 MHz | 1050 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 954 MHz | |
| Performance á point flottant | 762.6 gflops | 716.8 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | 384 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 23.83 GTexel / s | 22.4 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 23 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,870 million | 1,040 million |
| Stream Processors | 384 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | N / A |
| Longeur | 168 mm | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 2 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 40.1 GB / s | 72 GB/s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz | 1150 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | DDR3, GDDR5 | DDR3 / GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
| CUDA | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| Optimus | ||
| AppAcceleration | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| DDMA audio | ||
| FreeSync | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce 940MX avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce 940MX vs
NVIDIAGeForce2 Ti
NVIDIAGeForce 940MX vs
ATIRadeon 9700 PRO
NVIDIAGeForce 940MX vs
NVIDIAQuadro K2100M
NVIDIAGeForce 940MX vs
AMDRadeon R7 250
NVIDIAGeForce 940MX vs
AMDRadeon R5 330 OEM
NVIDIAGeForce 940MX vs
AMDRadeon 520
