NVIDIA GeForce GT 630 versus AMD Radeon HD 7570M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GT 630 and AMD Radeon HD 7570M pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire. 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 GT 630
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 4 mois plus tard
- Environ 62% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 810 MHz versus 500 MHz
- Environ 8% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 12.96 GTexel / s versus 12 GTexel / s
- Environ 58% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 676 versus 427
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 217 versus 190
- 2.3x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 2448 versus 1085
- 2.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 6.498 versus 3.109
- Environ 51% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.502 versus 0.333
- Environ 27% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1151 versus 905
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1853 versus 1797
- Environ 27% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1151 versus 905
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1853 versus 1797
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 15 May 2012 versus 7 January 2012 |
Vitesse du noyau | 810 MHz versus 500 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 12.96 GTexel / s versus 12 GTexel / s |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 676 versus 427 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 217 versus 190 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 2448 versus 1085 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 6.498 versus 3.109 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.502 versus 0.333 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1151 versus 905 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1853 versus 1797 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1151 versus 905 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1853 versus 1797 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon HD 7570M
- 4.2x plus de pipelines: 400 versus 96
- Environ 54% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 480.0 gflops versus 311.0 gflops
- 5x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 13 Watt versus 65 Watt
- Environ 78% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 3200 MHz versus 1800 MHz
- Environ 42% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 199.164 versus 140.06
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 10.489 versus 9.613
- 3.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 42.722 versus 12.49
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2352 versus 2073
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2352 versus 2073
Caractéristiques | |
Pipelines | 400 versus 96 |
Performance á point flottant | 480.0 gflops versus 311.0 gflops |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 13 Watt versus 65 Watt |
Vitesse de mémoire | 3200 MHz versus 1800 MHz |
Référence | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 199.164 versus 140.06 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 10.489 versus 9.613 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 42.722 versus 12.49 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2352 versus 2073 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2352 versus 2073 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GT 630
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 7570M
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 GT 630 | AMD Radeon HD 7570M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 676 | 427 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 217 | 190 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 2448 | 1085 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 6.498 | 3.109 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 140.06 | 199.164 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.502 | 0.333 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 9.613 | 10.489 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 12.49 | 42.722 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1151 | 905 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1853 | 1797 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2073 | 2352 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1151 | 905 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1853 | 1797 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2073 | 2352 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 170 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA GeForce GT 630 | AMD Radeon HD 7570M | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Fermi | TeraScale 2 |
Nom de code | GF108 | Thames |
Date de sortie | 15 May 2012 | 7 January 2012 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $99.99 | |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1445 | 1446 |
Prix maintenant | $99.21 | |
Genre | Desktop | Laptop |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 8.89 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse du noyau | 810 MHz | 500 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 311.0 gflops | 480.0 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 40 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 96 | 400 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 12.96 GTexel / s | 12 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt | 13 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 585 million | 716 million |
Vitesse augmenté | 650 MHz | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Longeur | 145 mm | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 11.2 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 1 GB | 1 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 28.8 GB / s | 25.6 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1800 MHz | 3200 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | DDR3 | GDDR5 / DDR3 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 |