NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 OEM versus NVIDIA Quadro K2000
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 OEM and NVIDIA Quadro K2000 pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire. 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), PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, 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 950 OEM
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 10 mois plus tard
- Environ 99% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 60.8 GTexel / s versus 30.53 GTexel / s
- 2.7x plus de pipelines: 1024 versus 384
- 2.7x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,946 gflops versus 732.7 gflops
- Environ 25% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 5012 MHz versus 4000 MHz
- 4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 56.869 versus 14.332
- 3.5x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 917.535 versus 265.424
- 3.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.351 versus 1.093
- 2.5x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 37.323 versus 15.009
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 86.304 versus 38.219
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 1 January 2016 versus 1 March 2013 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 60.8 GTexel / s versus 30.53 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1024 versus 384 |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,946 gflops versus 732.7 gflops |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz versus 4000 MHz |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 56.869 versus 14.332 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 917.535 versus 265.424 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.351 versus 1.093 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 37.323 versus 15.009 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 86.304 versus 38.219 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro K2000
- Environ 3% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 954 MHz versus 924 MHz
| Vitesse du noyau | 954 MHz versus 924 MHz |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 OEM
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K2000
| 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) |
|
|
| Nom | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 OEM | NVIDIA Quadro K2000 |
|---|---|---|
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 56.869 | 14.332 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 917.535 | 265.424 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.351 | 1.093 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 37.323 | 15.009 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 86.304 | 38.219 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1580 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 384 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 4071 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2446 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1631 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1974 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2446 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1631 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1974 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 OEM | NVIDIA Quadro K2000 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Kepler |
| Nom de code | GM206 | GK107 |
| Date de sortie | 1 January 2016 | 1 March 2013 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1210 | 1212 |
| Genre | Desktop | Workstation |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $599 | |
| Prix maintenant | $164.99 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 11.74 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 950 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 924 MHz | 954 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,946 gflops | 732.7 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 1024 | 384 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 60.8 GTexel / s | 30.53 GTexel / s |
| Compte de transistor | 2,940 million | 1,270 million |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 51 Watt | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
| Longeur | 202 mm | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 80.19 GB / s | 64 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz | 4000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 OEM avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 950 OEM vs
ATIRadeon 9800 SE
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 950 OEM vs
NVIDIAGeForce4 MX 4000
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 950 OEM vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 625M
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 950 OEM vs
NVIDIAQuadro K2000
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 950 OEM vs
AMDFirePro W2100
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 950 OEM vs
AMDRadeon R5 430 OEM
