NVIDIA GeForce 945M versus NVIDIA GRID K2
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce 945M and NVIDIA GRID K2 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).
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce 945M
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 5 mois plus tard
- Environ 38% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1029 MHz versus 745 MHz
- 3x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 75 Watt versus 225 Watt
- Environ 51% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 28.633 versus 18.948
- 10.7x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3683 versus 344
- 10.7x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3343 versus 312
- 10.7x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3683 versus 344
- 10.7x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3343 versus 312
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 27 October 2015 versus 11 May 2013 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1029 MHz versus 745 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt versus 225 Watt |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 28.633 versus 18.948 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3683 versus 344 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3343 versus 312 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3683 versus 344 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3343 versus 312 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GRID K2
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 2x 95.36 GTexel / s billion / sec versus 29.81 GTexel / s
- 6x plus de pipelines: 2x 1536 versus 512
- 4.8x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2x 2,289 gflops versus 953.9 gflops
- 4x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 2x 4 GB versus 2 GB
- 2.8x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 5000 MHz versus 1800 MHz
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 2737 versus 2109
- Environ 33% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 319 versus 240
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 10550 versus 8099
- 2.5x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 968.568 versus 380.461
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.58 versus 1.988
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 32.988 versus 31.027
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 114.144 versus 107.094
- 2.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6371 versus 2961
- 2.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6371 versus 2961
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 2x 95.36 GTexel / s billion / sec versus 29.81 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 2x 1536 versus 512 |
| Performance á point flottant | 2x 2,289 gflops versus 953.9 gflops |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 2x 4 GB versus 2 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5000 MHz versus 1800 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2737 versus 2109 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 319 versus 240 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 10550 versus 8099 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 968.568 versus 380.461 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.58 versus 1.988 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 32.988 versus 31.027 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 114.144 versus 107.094 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6371 versus 2961 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6371 versus 2961 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 945M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GRID K2
| 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 945M | NVIDIA GRID K2 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2109 | 2737 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 240 | 319 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 8099 | 10550 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 28.633 | 18.948 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 380.461 | 968.568 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.988 | 2.58 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 31.027 | 32.988 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 107.094 | 114.144 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2961 | 6371 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3683 | 344 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3343 | 312 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2961 | 6371 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3683 | 344 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3343 | 312 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce 945M | NVIDIA GRID K2 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | Kepler |
| Nom de code | GM107 | GK104 |
| Date de sortie | 27 October 2015 | 11 May 2013 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 974 | 976 |
| Genre | Laptop | Workstation |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $5,199 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1085 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1029 MHz | 745 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 953.9 gflops | 2x 2,289 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 512 | 2x 1536 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 29.81 GTexel / s | 2x 95.36 GTexel / s billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 225 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,870 million | 3,540 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 1x 8-pin |
| Longeur | 267 mm | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 2x 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 16.02 GB / s | 2x 160.0 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 2x 256 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1800 MHz | 5000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | DDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| CUDA | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| Optimus | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce 945M avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce 945M vs
ATIFireGL T2-128
NVIDIAGeForce 945M vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 1100
NVIDIAGeForce 945M vs
NVIDIAQuadro K2000D
NVIDIAGeForce 945M vs
NVIDIAGRID K2
NVIDIAGeForce 945M vs
NVIDIAQuadro K620
NVIDIAGeForce 945M vs
AMDRadeon Vega 8 Efficient
