NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M versus NVIDIA Quadro 2000
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M and NVIDIA Quadro 2000 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 745M
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 3 mois plus tard
- Environ 34% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 837 MHz versus 625 MHz
- Environ 34% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 26.78 GTexel / s versus 20 GTexel / s
- 2x plus de pipelines: 384 versus 192
- Environ 34% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 642.8 gflops versus 480.0 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 28 nm versus 40 nm
- Environ 38% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 45 Watt versus 62 Watt
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 2 GB versus 1 GB
- Environ 15% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1091 versus 947
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 10.489 versus 10.267
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 19.323 versus 19.02
- Environ 41% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2255 versus 1600
- Environ 86% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3133 versus 1682
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3352 versus 2668
- Environ 41% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2255 versus 1600
- Environ 86% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3133 versus 1682
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3352 versus 2668
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 1 April 2013 versus 24 December 2010 |
Vitesse du noyau | 837 MHz versus 625 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 26.78 GTexel / s versus 20 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 384 versus 192 |
Performance á point flottant | 642.8 gflops versus 480.0 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm versus 40 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt versus 62 Watt |
Taille de mémore maximale | 2 GB versus 1 GB |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1091 versus 947 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 10.489 versus 10.267 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 19.323 versus 19.02 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2255 versus 1600 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3133 versus 1682 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3352 versus 2668 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2255 versus 1600 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3133 versus 1682 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3352 versus 2668 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro 2000
- Environ 44% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 2600 MHz versus 1800 MHz
- Environ 68% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 301 versus 179
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 3902 versus 3439
- Environ 27% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 258.26 versus 202.905
- Environ 34% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.885 versus 0.66
- Environ 67% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 13.688 versus 8.184
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse de mémoire | 2600 MHz versus 1800 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 301 versus 179 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3902 versus 3439 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 258.26 versus 202.905 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.885 versus 0.66 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 13.688 versus 8.184 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro 2000
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 745M | NVIDIA Quadro 2000 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1091 | 947 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 179 | 301 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3439 | 3902 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 10.489 | 10.267 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 202.905 | 258.26 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.66 | 0.885 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 8.184 | 13.688 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 19.323 | 19.02 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2255 | 1600 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3133 | 1682 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3352 | 2668 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2255 | 1600 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3133 | 1682 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3352 | 2668 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M | NVIDIA Quadro 2000 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Kepler | Fermi |
Nom de code | GK107 | GF106 |
Date de sortie | 1 April 2013 | 24 December 2010 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1287 | 1290 |
Genre | Laptop | Workstation |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $599 | |
Prix maintenant | $87.99 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 17.65 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse du noyau | 837 MHz | 625 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 642.8 gflops | 480.0 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 384 | 192 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 26.78 GTexel / s | 20 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt | 62 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 1,270 million | 1,170 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Audio HD reseau 7.1 sur HDMI | ||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
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 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
Longeur | 178 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 | 1 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 28.8 GB / s | 41.6 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1800 MHz | 2600 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | DDR3, GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Configuration standard de la mémoire | DDR3 / GDDR5 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision | ||
3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
Blu-Ray 3D Support | ||
CUDA | ||
Direct Compute | ||
FXAA | ||
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
Optimus |