NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 versus AMD Radeon HD 8970M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 and AMD Radeon HD 8970M 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: 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), PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 3 mois plus tard
- Environ 2% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 863 MHz versus 850 MHz
- Environ 6% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 902 MHz versus 850 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 173.2 GTexel / s versus 72 GTexel / s
- Environ 80% de pipelines plus haut: 2304 versus 1280
- Environ 80% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 4,156 gflops versus 2,304 gflops
- Environ 25% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 6008 MHz versus 4800 MHz
- Environ 18% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1441.971 versus 1223.742
- Environ 27% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 7.36 versus 5.78
- 3.7x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 9209 versus 2521
- Environ 28% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3331 versus 2595
- 3.7x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 9209 versus 2521
- Environ 28% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3331 versus 2595
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 10 September 2013 versus 14 May 2013 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 863 MHz versus 850 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 902 MHz versus 850 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 173.2 GTexel / s versus 72 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 2304 versus 1280 |
| Performance á point flottant | 4,156 gflops versus 2,304 gflops |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 6008 MHz versus 4800 MHz |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1441.971 versus 1223.742 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 7.36 versus 5.78 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9209 versus 2521 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3331 versus 2595 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9209 versus 2521 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3331 versus 2595 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon HD 8970M
- 2.5x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 100 Watt versus 250 Watt
- Environ 33% plus de taille maximale de mémoire: 4 GB versus 3 GB
- Environ 90% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 57.241 versus 30.133
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 89.306 versus 64.264
- Environ 81% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 268.643 versus 148.747
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3688 versus 3582
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3688 versus 3582
| Caractéristiques | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt versus 250 Watt |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 4 GB versus 3 GB |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 57.241 versus 30.133 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 89.306 versus 64.264 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 268.643 versus 148.747 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3688 versus 3582 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3688 versus 3582 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 8970M
| 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 780 Rev. 2 | AMD Radeon HD 8970M |
|---|---|---|
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 30.133 | 57.241 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1441.971 | 1223.742 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 7.36 | 5.78 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 64.264 | 89.306 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 148.747 | 268.643 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9209 | 2521 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3582 | 3688 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3331 | 2595 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9209 | 2521 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3582 | 3688 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3331 | 2595 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3876 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 807 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 20588 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 | AMD Radeon HD 8970M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 1.0 |
| Nom de code | GK110B | Neptune |
| Date de sortie | 10 September 2013 | 14 May 2013 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $649 | |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 554 | 555 |
| Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
| Conception | AMD Radeon HD 8000M Series | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 902 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 863 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 4,156 gflops | 2,304 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 2304 | 1280 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 173.2 GTexel / s | 72 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 250 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 7,080 million | 2,800 million |
| Unités de Compute | 20 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 267 mm | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | |
| Taille du laptop | large | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 11 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 3 GB | 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 288.4 GB / s | 153.6 GB/s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 384 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 6008 MHz | 4800 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| ZeroCore | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 vs
AMDRadeon HD 8970M
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960A
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 vs
AMDRadeon R9 370X
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 vs
NVIDIAP104-100
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 vs
AMDRadeon Pro 560X
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 vs
NVIDIACMP 50HX
