NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 versus AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 and AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM 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 GT 710
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 4 mois plus tard
- Environ 31% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 954 MHz versus 730 MHz
- 2.6x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 19 Watt versus 50 Watt
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 623 versus 548
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 212 versus 194
- Environ 16% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1494 versus 1284
- Environ 16% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1494 versus 1284
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 27 March 2014 versus 1 November 2013 |
Vitesse du noyau | 954 MHz versus 730 MHz |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 19 Watt versus 50 Watt |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 623 versus 548 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 212 versus 194 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1494 versus 1284 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1494 versus 1284 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM
- Environ 2% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 15.6 GTexel / s versus 15.26 GTexel / s
- Environ 67% de pipelines plus haut: 320 versus 192
- Environ 36% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 499.2 gflops versus 366.3 gflops
- 1800x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 1800 MHz versus 1.8 GB/s
- 2.5x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 4936 versus 1946
- 2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 13.569 versus 6.705
- Environ 62% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 162.886 versus 100.391
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.009 versus 0.441
- 2.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 19.668 versus 8.146
- 3.8x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 77.819 versus 20.64
- Environ 15% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1119 versus 977
- Environ 24% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2264 versus 1833
- Environ 15% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1119 versus 977
- Environ 24% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2264 versus 1833
Caractéristiques | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 15.6 GTexel / s versus 15.26 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 320 versus 192 |
Performance á point flottant | 499.2 gflops versus 366.3 gflops |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1800 MHz versus 1.8 GB/s |
Référence | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 4936 versus 1946 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 13.569 versus 6.705 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 162.886 versus 100.391 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.009 versus 0.441 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 19.668 versus 8.146 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 77.819 versus 20.64 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1119 versus 977 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2264 versus 1833 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1119 versus 977 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2264 versus 1833 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GT 710
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM
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 710 | AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 623 | 548 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 212 | 194 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 1946 | 4936 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 6.705 | 13.569 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 100.391 | 162.886 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.441 | 1.009 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 8.146 | 19.668 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 20.64 | 77.819 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 977 | 1119 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1494 | 1284 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1833 | 2264 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 977 | 1119 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1494 | 1284 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1833 | 2264 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 192 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA GeForce GT 710 | AMD Radeon R5 240 OEM | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Kepler 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
Nom de code | GK208B | Oland |
Date de sortie | 27 March 2014 | 1 November 2013 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $34.99 | |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1488 | 1406 |
Prix maintenant | $34.99 | |
Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 23.15 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse du noyau | 954 MHz | 730 MHz |
Noyaux CUDA | 192 | |
Performance á point flottant | 366.3 gflops | 499.2 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Température maximale du GPU | 95 °C | |
Pipelines | 192 | 320 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 15.26 GTexel / s | 15.6 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 19 Watt | 50 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 292 million | 1,040 million |
Vitesse augmenté | 780 MHz | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Contribution d’audio pour HDMI | Internal | |
Connecteurs d’écran | Dual Link DVI-DHDMIVGA, 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
HDCP | ||
HDMI | ||
Résolution VGA maximale | 2048x1536 | |
Soutien de plusiers moniteurs | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Soutien de bus | PCI Express 2.0 | |
Hauteur | 2.713" (6.9 cm) | |
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
Longeur | 5.7" (14.5 cm) | 168 mm |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_1) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 2 GB | 2 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 14.4 GB / s | 28.8 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1.8 GB/s | 1800 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | DDR3 | DDR3 |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision | ||
Adaptive VSync | ||
CUDA | ||
FXAA | ||
PhysX | ||
PureVideo |