NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 versus NVIDIA Tesla C2070
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 and NVIDIA Tesla C2070 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 GTX 750
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 6 mois plus tard
- Environ 77% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1020 MHz versus 575 MHz
- Environ 8% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 34.72 GTexel / s versus 32.2 GTexel / s
- Environ 14% de pipelines plus haut: 512 versus 448
- Environ 8% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,111 gflops versus 1,030.4 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 28 nm versus 40 nm
- 4.3x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 55 Watt versus 238 Watt
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3347 versus 3121
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 507 versus 462
- Environ 31% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 34.239 versus 26.223
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4498 versus 3245
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4498 versus 3245
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 18 February 2014 versus 25 July 2011 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1020 MHz versus 575 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 34.72 GTexel / s versus 32.2 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 512 versus 448 |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,111 gflops versus 1,030.4 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm versus 40 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 55 Watt versus 238 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3347 versus 3121 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 507 versus 462 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 34.239 versus 26.223 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4498 versus 3245 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4498 versus 3245 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Tesla C2070
- 6x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 6 GB versus 1 GB
- 600x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 3000 MHz versus 5.0 GB/s
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 9716 versus 9266
- Environ 42% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 908.754 versus 639.427
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.015 versus 2.341
- Environ 36% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 43.519 versus 32
- Environ 34% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 93.344 versus 69.814
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 6 GB versus 1 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 3000 MHz versus 5.0 GB/s |
| Référence | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 9716 versus 9266 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 908.754 versus 639.427 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.015 versus 2.341 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 43.519 versus 32 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 93.344 versus 69.814 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3710 versus 3704 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3351 versus 3346 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3710 versus 3704 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3351 versus 3346 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750
GPU 2: NVIDIA Tesla C2070
| 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 GTX 750 | NVIDIA Tesla C2070 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3347 | 3121 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 507 | 462 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 9266 | 9716 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 34.239 | 26.223 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 639.427 | 908.754 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.341 | 3.015 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 32 | 43.519 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 69.814 | 93.344 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4498 | 3245 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3704 | 3710 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3346 | 3351 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4498 | 3245 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3704 | 3710 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3346 | 3351 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1049 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 | NVIDIA Tesla C2070 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | Fermi |
| Nom de code | GM107 | GF100 |
| Date de sortie | 18 February 2014 | 25 July 2011 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $119 | |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 755 | 757 |
| Prix maintenant | $150.99 | |
| Genre | Desktop | Workstation |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 27.54 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1085 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1020 MHz | 575 MHz |
| Noyaux CUDA | 512 | |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,111 gflops | 1,030.4 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Température maximale du GPU | 95 °C | |
| Pipelines | 512 | 448 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 34.72 GTexel / s | 32.2 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 55 Watt | 238 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,870 million | 3,100 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Contribution d’audio pour HDMI | Internal | |
| Connecteurs d’écran | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI, One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One mini... | 1x DVI |
| Soutien de G-SYNC | ||
| HDCP | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Résolution VGA maximale | 2048x1536 | |
| Soutien de plusiers moniteurs | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Hauteur | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 5.7" (14.5 cm) | 248 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 1x 8-pin |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 1 GB | 6 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 80 GB / s | 144.0 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5.0 GB/s | 3000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Gaming | ||
| 3D Vision | ||
| 3D Vision Live | ||
| Adaptive VSync | ||
| Blu Ray 3D | ||
| CUDA | ||
| FXAA | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| TXAA | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 750 vs
ATIMobility Radeon X1700
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 750 vs
ATIRadeon HD 4770
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 750 vs
ATIRadeon HD 4290 IGP
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 750 vs
NVIDIATesla C2070
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 750 vs
AMDRadeon HD 8970 OEM
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 750 vs
AMDRadeon 630
