NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M versus NVIDIA Tesla C2070
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M 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 880M
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 7 mois plus tard
- Environ 66% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 954 MHz versus 575 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 127.1 GTexel / s versus 32.2 GTexel / s
- 3.4x plus de pipelines: 1536 versus 448
- 3x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 3,050 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
- Environ 95% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 122 Watt versus 238 Watt
- Environ 33% plus de taille maximale de mémoire: 8 GB versus 6 GB
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3817 versus 3121
- Environ 55% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 15023 versus 9716
- Environ 76% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 46.273 versus 26.223
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.914 versus 3.015
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4501 versus 3245
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4501 versus 3245
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 12 March 2014 versus 25 July 2011 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 954 MHz versus 575 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 127.1 GTexel / s versus 32.2 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1536 versus 448 |
| Performance á point flottant | 3,050 gflops versus 1,030.4 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm versus 40 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 122 Watt versus 238 Watt |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 8 GB versus 6 GB |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3817 versus 3121 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 15023 versus 9716 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 46.273 versus 26.223 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.914 versus 3.015 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4501 versus 3245 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3718 versus 3710 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 versus 3351 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4501 versus 3245 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3718 versus 3710 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 versus 3351 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Tesla C2070
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 462 versus 330
- Environ 17% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 908.754 versus 777.677
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 43.519 versus 38.196
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 93.344 versus 82.511
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 462 versus 330 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 908.754 versus 777.677 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 43.519 versus 38.196 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 93.344 versus 82.511 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M
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 880M | NVIDIA Tesla C2070 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3817 | 3121 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 330 | 462 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 15023 | 9716 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 46.273 | 26.223 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 777.677 | 908.754 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.914 | 3.015 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 38.196 | 43.519 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 82.511 | 93.344 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4501 | 3245 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3718 | 3710 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 | 3351 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4501 | 3245 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3718 | 3710 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 | 3351 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1611 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M | NVIDIA Tesla C2070 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Kepler | Fermi |
| Nom de code | GK104 | GF100 |
| Date de sortie | 12 March 2014 | 25 July 2011 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 763 | 765 |
| Genre | Laptop | Workstation |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 993 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 954 MHz | 575 MHz |
| Noyaux CUDA | 1536 | |
| Performance á point flottant | 3,050 gflops | 1,030.4 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 1536 | 448 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 127.1 GTexel / s | 32.2 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 122 Watt | 238 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 3,540 million | 3,100 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Audio HD reseau 7.1 sur HDMI | ||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 1x DVI |
| 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 2.0, PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Taille du laptop | large | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 1x 8-pin |
| Longeur | 248 mm | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 8 GB | 6 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 160.0 GB / s | 144.0 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 256 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
| Configuration standard de la mémoire | GDDR5 | |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 3000 MHz | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Blu-Ray | ||
| BatteryBoost | ||
| CUDA | ||
| Direct Compute | ||
| FXAA | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
| Optimus | ||
| SLI | ||
| TXAA | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 880M vs
ATIMobility Radeon X1700
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 880M vs
NVIDIATesla C2070
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 880M vs
AMDRadeon HD 8970 OEM
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 880M vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960M
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 880M vs
AMDRadeon 630
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 880M vs
IntelUHD Graphics 750
