NVIDIA GeForce GT 735M versus NVIDIA Quadro 410
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GT 735M and NVIDIA Quadro 410 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 GT 735M
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 7 mois plus tard
- 2x plus de pipelines: 384 versus 192
- Environ 63% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 441.6 gflops versus 271.1 gflops
- Environ 15% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 33 Watt versus 38 Watt
- 4x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 2 GB versus 512 MB
- Environ 1% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 1800 MHz versus 1782 MHz
- Environ 48% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 650 versus 438
- 2.6x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 3749 versus 1446
- Environ 59% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 8.572 versus 5.393
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 151.304 versus 126.006
- 2.5x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 13.943 versus 5.685
- 4.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 39.301 versus 8.847
- Environ 66% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1524 versus 919
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1426 versus 1311
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2519 versus 1794
- Environ 66% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1524 versus 919
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1426 versus 1311
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2519 versus 1794
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 1 April 2013 versus 7 August 2012 |
Pipelines | 384 versus 192 |
Performance á point flottant | 441.6 gflops versus 271.1 gflops |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 33 Watt versus 38 Watt |
Taille de mémore maximale | 2 GB versus 512 MB |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1800 MHz versus 1782 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 650 versus 438 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3749 versus 1446 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 8.572 versus 5.393 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 151.304 versus 126.006 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 13.943 versus 5.685 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 39.301 versus 8.847 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1524 versus 919 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1426 versus 1311 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2519 versus 1794 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1524 versus 919 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1426 versus 1311 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2519 versus 1794 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro 410
- Environ 23% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 706 MHz versus 575 MHz
- Environ 23% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 11.3 GTexel / s versus 9.2 GTexel / s
- Environ 70% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 219 versus 129
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 706 MHz versus 575 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 11.3 GTexel / s versus 9.2 GTexel / s |
Référence | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 219 versus 129 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GT 735M
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro 410
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 735M | NVIDIA Quadro 410 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 650 | 438 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 129 | 219 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3749 | 1446 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 8.572 | 5.393 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 151.304 | 126.006 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.808 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 13.943 | 5.685 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 39.301 | 8.847 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1524 | 919 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1426 | 1311 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2519 | 1794 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1524 | 919 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1426 | 1311 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2519 | 1794 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA GeForce GT 735M | NVIDIA Quadro 410 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Kepler 2.0 | Kepler |
Nom de code | GK208 | GK107 |
Date de sortie | 1 April 2013 | 7 August 2012 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1460 | 1461 |
Genre | Laptop | Workstation |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $149 | |
Prix maintenant | $272.28 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 1.70 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 889 MHz | |
Vitesse du noyau | 575 MHz | 706 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 441.6 gflops | 271.1 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 384 | 192 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 9.2 GTexel / s | 11.3 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 33 Watt | 38 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 1,270 million | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Audio HD reseau 7.1 sur HDMI | ||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort |
Soutien de DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) | Up to 3840x2160 | |
Soutien du signal sDP 1.2 | Up to 3840x2160 | |
Protection du contenu HDCP | ||
HDMI | ||
Support du signale LVDS | Up to 1920x1200 | |
Bitstreaming d’audio TrueHD et DTS-HD | ||
Soutien de l’écran analog VGA | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0 | |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Longeur | 176 mm | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12 API | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 2 GB | 512 MB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 14.4 GB / s | 14.26 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 Bit | 64 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1800 MHz | 1782 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | DDR3 | DDR3 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Configuration standard de la mémoire | DDR3 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision | ||
3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
Blu-Ray 3D Support | ||
CUDA | ||
Direct Compute | ||
FXAA | ||
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
Optimus |