NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX versus NVIDIA GeForce GT 425M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX and NVIDIA GeForce GT 425M 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 - 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 - T-Rex (Frames/s).
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 8 mois plus tard
- Environ 7% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 7.2 billion / sec versus 6.7 billion / sec
- Environ 15% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 20 Watt versus 23 Watt
- Environ 13% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 900 MHz versus 800 MHz
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 15.403 versus 13.944
- 2.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1583 versus 719
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 1639 versus 690
- 2.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1583 versus 719
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 1639 versus 690
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 30 May 2011 versus 3 September 2010 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 7.2 billion / sec versus 6.7 billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 20 Watt versus 23 Watt |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 900 MHz versus 800 MHz |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 15.403 versus 13.944 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1583 versus 719 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1639 versus 690 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1583 versus 719 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1639 versus 690 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GT 425M
- Environ 24% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1120 MHz versus 900 MHz
- 2x plus de pipelines: 96 versus 48
- Environ 24% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 215.04 gflops versus 172.8 gflops
- Environ 84% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 522 versus 284
- 3.2x meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 174 versus 54
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 1875 versus 1490
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 4.184 versus 3.315
- Environ 41% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 172.058 versus 122.375
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 8.145 versus 7.629
- Environ 24% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 859 versus 692
- Environ 24% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 859 versus 692
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1120 MHz versus 900 MHz |
| Pipelines | 96 versus 48 |
| Performance á point flottant | 215.04 gflops versus 172.8 gflops |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 522 versus 284 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 174 versus 54 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 1875 versus 1490 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 4.184 versus 3.315 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 172.058 versus 122.375 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 8.145 versus 7.629 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 859 versus 692 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 859 versus 692 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 425M
| 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 - 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 GT 520MX | NVIDIA GeForce GT 425M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 284 | 522 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 54 | 174 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 1490 | 1875 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 3.315 | 4.184 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 122.375 | 172.058 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 7.629 | 8.145 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 15.403 | 13.944 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 692 | 859 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1583 | 719 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1639 | 690 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 692 | 859 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1583 | 719 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1639 | 690 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.459 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX | NVIDIA GeForce GT 425M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 | Fermi |
| Nom de code | GF119 | GF108 |
| Date de sortie | 30 May 2011 | 3 September 2010 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1572 | 1574 |
| Genre | Laptop | Laptop |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse du noyau | 900 MHz | 1120 MHz |
| Noyaux CUDA | 48 | 96 |
| Performance á point flottant | 172.8 gflops | 215.04 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 40 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 48 | 96 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 7.2 billion / sec | 6.7 billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 20 Watt | 23 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 292 million | 585 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12 API | 12 API |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 1 GB | 1 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 14.4 GB / s | 25.6 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 900 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
| CUDA | ||
| DirectCompute | ||
| DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 |
| Optimus | ||
| Verde Drivers | ||
| 3D Vision | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce GT 520MX avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520MX vs
ATIRadeon X1650
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520MX vs
IntelGraphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 600
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520MX vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 425M
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520MX vs
ATIRadeon HD 5770 X2
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520MX vs
NVIDIAGeForce 605 OEM
NVIDIAGeForce GT 520MX vs
NVIDIANVS 315
