NVIDIA GeForce 945M versus NVIDIA Quadro K2000D
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce 945M and NVIDIA Quadro K2000D 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 7 mois plus tard
- Environ 8% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1029 MHz versus 954 MHz
- Environ 33% de pipelines plus haut: 512 versus 384
- Environ 30% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 953.9 gflops versus 732.7 gflops
- Environ 33% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 2109 versus 1586
- 2x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 8099 versus 3973
- 2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 28.633 versus 14.283
- Environ 95% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.988 versus 1.018
- Environ 99% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 31.027 versus 15.605
- 3.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 107.094 versus 31.155
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2961 versus 2646
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3683 versus 3493
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2961 versus 2646
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3683 versus 3493
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 27 October 2015 versus 1 March 2013 |
Vitesse du noyau | 1029 MHz versus 954 MHz |
Pipelines | 512 versus 384 |
Performance á point flottant | 953.9 gflops versus 732.7 gflops |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2109 versus 1586 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 8099 versus 3973 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 28.633 versus 14.283 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.988 versus 1.018 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 31.027 versus 15.605 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 107.094 versus 31.155 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2961 versus 2646 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3683 versus 3493 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3343 versus 3339 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2961 versus 2646 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3683 versus 3493 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3343 versus 3339 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro K2000D
- Environ 2% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 30.53 GTexel / s versus 29.81 GTexel / s
- Environ 47% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 51 Watt versus 75 Watt
- 2.2x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 4000 MHz versus 1800 MHz
- Environ 69% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 406 versus 240
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 386.006 versus 380.461
Caractéristiques | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 30.53 GTexel / s versus 29.81 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 51 Watt versus 75 Watt |
Vitesse de mémoire | 4000 MHz versus 1800 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 406 versus 240 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 386.006 versus 380.461 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 945M
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K2000D
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 Quadro K2000D |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2109 | 1586 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 240 | 406 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 8099 | 3973 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 28.633 | 14.283 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 380.461 | 386.006 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.988 | 1.018 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 31.027 | 15.605 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 107.094 | 31.155 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2961 | 2646 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3683 | 3493 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3343 | 3339 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2961 | 2646 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3683 | 3493 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3343 | 3339 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA GeForce 945M | NVIDIA Quadro K2000D | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Maxwell | Kepler |
Nom de code | GM107 | GK107 |
Date de sortie | 27 October 2015 | 1 March 2013 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 974 | 977 |
Genre | Laptop | Workstation |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $599 | |
Prix maintenant | $464 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 4.14 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1085 MHz | |
Vitesse du noyau | 1029 MHz | 954 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 953.9 gflops | 732.7 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 512 | 384 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 29.81 GTexel / s | 30.53 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 51 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 1,870 million | 1,270 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x mini-DisplayPort |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0 | |
Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
Longeur | 202 mm | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 2 GB | 2 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 16.02 GB / s | 64 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1800 MHz | 4000 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | DDR3 | GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
CUDA | ||
GameWorks | ||
GeForce Experience | ||
GPU Boost | ||
Optimus |