NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 versus AMD Radeon R7 250
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 and AMD Radeon R7 250 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 740
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 7 mois plus tard
- Environ 42% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 31.78 GTexel / s versus 22.4 GTexel / s
- Environ 6% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 762.6 gflops versus 716.8 gflops
- Environ 17% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 64 Watt versus 75 Watt
- 4.4x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 5012 MHz versus 1150 MHz
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1469 versus 1051
- Environ 23% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 349 versus 283
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 29 May 2014 versus 8 October 2013 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 31.78 GTexel / s versus 22.4 GTexel / s |
Performance á point flottant | 762.6 gflops versus 716.8 gflops |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 64 Watt versus 75 Watt |
Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz versus 1150 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1469 versus 1051 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 349 versus 283 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R7 250
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 2 GB versus 1 GB
- Environ 76% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 7525 versus 4271
- Environ 68% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 20.161 versus 11.994
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 304.279 versus 291.627
- Environ 62% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.655 versus 1.023
- Environ 98% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 30.046 versus 15.139
- 4.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 96.934 versus 23.651
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2179 versus 1790
- 2.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3170 versus 1427
- Environ 56% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3356 versus 2153
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2179 versus 1790
- 2.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3170 versus 1427
- Environ 56% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3356 versus 2153
Caractéristiques | |
Taille de mémore maximale | 2 GB versus 1 GB |
Référence | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 7525 versus 4271 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 20.161 versus 11.994 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 304.279 versus 291.627 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.655 versus 1.023 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 30.046 versus 15.139 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 96.934 versus 23.651 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2179 versus 1790 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3170 versus 1427 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 versus 2153 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2179 versus 1790 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3170 versus 1427 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 versus 2153 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GT 740
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 250
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 740 | AMD Radeon R7 250 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1469 | 1051 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 349 | 283 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 4271 | 7525 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 11.994 | 20.161 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 291.627 | 304.279 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.023 | 1.655 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 15.139 | 30.046 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 23.651 | 96.934 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1790 | 2179 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1427 | 3170 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2153 | 3356 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1790 | 2179 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1427 | 3170 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2153 | 3356 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 513 | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 | AMD Radeon R7 250 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Kepler | GCN 1.0 |
Nom de code | GK107 | Oland |
Date de sortie | 29 May 2014 | 8 October 2013 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $89 | $89 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1270 | 1087 |
Prix maintenant | $94.99 | $78.34 |
Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 18.87 | 27.62 |
Conception | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse du noyau | 993 MHz | |
Performance á point flottant | 762.6 gflops | 716.8 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 384 | 384 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 31.78 GTexel / s | 22.4 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 64 Watt | 75 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 1,270 million | 1,040 million |
Vitesse augmenté | 1050 MHz | |
Stream Processors | 384 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
HDMI | ||
VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
Longeur | 145 mm | 168 mm |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 6-pin | N / A |
Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 1 GB | 2 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 80.19 GB / s | 72 GB/s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz | 1150 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | DDR3 / GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
AppAcceleration | ||
CrossFire | ||
DDMA audio | ||
FreeSync |