NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 versus NVIDIA Quadro K5200
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 and NVIDIA Quadro K5200 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 950
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 0 mois plus tard
- Environ 54% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1024 MHz versus 667 MHz
- Environ 54% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1188 MHz versus 771 MHz
- Environ 67% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 90 Watt versus 150 Watt
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 643 versus 541
- Environ 28% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 60.473 versus 47.147
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 4.279 versus 3.996
- 2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 231.508 versus 115.307
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6803 versus 5946
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6803 versus 5946
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 20 August 2015 versus 22 July 2014 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1024 MHz versus 667 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1188 MHz versus 771 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 90 Watt versus 150 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 643 versus 541 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 60.473 versus 47.147 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.279 versus 3.996 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 231.508 versus 115.307 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6803 versus 5946 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 versus 3353 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6803 versus 5946 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 versus 3353 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro K5200
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 148.0 GTexel / s versus 49.2 billion / sec
- 3x plus de pipelines: 2304 versus 768
- Environ 95% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 3,553 gflops versus 1,825 gflops
- 4x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 8 GB versus 2 GB
- 1001.3x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 6008 MHz versus 6.6 GB/s
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 6092 versus 5335
- Environ 16% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 19354 versus 16715
- Environ 68% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1278.433 versus 758.865
- Environ 68% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 50.08 versus 29.738
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 148.0 GTexel / s versus 49.2 billion / sec |
| Pipelines | 2304 versus 768 |
| Performance á point flottant | 3,553 gflops versus 1,825 gflops |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 8 GB versus 2 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 6008 MHz versus 6.6 GB/s |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6092 versus 5335 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 19354 versus 16715 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1278.433 versus 758.865 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 50.08 versus 29.738 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3708 versus 3697 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3708 versus 3697 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K5200
| 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 950 | NVIDIA Quadro K5200 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 5335 | 6092 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 643 | 541 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 16715 | 19354 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 60.473 | 47.147 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 758.865 | 1278.433 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.279 | 3.996 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 29.738 | 50.08 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 231.508 | 115.307 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6803 | 5946 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3697 | 3708 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 | 3353 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6803 | 5946 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3697 | 3708 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 | 3353 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1862 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 | NVIDIA Quadro K5200 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Kepler |
| Nom de code | GM206 | GK110B |
| Date de sortie | 20 August 2015 | 22 July 2014 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $159 | $1,699.74 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 540 | 541 |
| Prix maintenant | $194.44 | $523.66 |
| Genre | Desktop | Workstation |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 30.06 | 14.51 |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1188 MHz | 771 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1024 MHz | 667 MHz |
| Noyaux CUDA | 768 | |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,825 gflops | 3,553 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 768 | 2304 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 49.2 billion / sec | 148.0 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 90 Watt | 150 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 2,940 million | 7,080 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Contribution d’audio pour HDMI | Internal | |
| Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort, Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 | 2x DVI, 2x DisplayPort |
| Soutien de G-SYNC | ||
| HDCP | ||
| 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 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 7.938" (20.2 cm) | 267 mm |
| Énergie du systeme recommandé (PSU) | 350 Watt | |
| Options SLI | 2x | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 6-pins | 1x 6-pin |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 8 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 105.6 GB / s | 192.3 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 6.6 GB/s | 6008 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision | ||
| Adaptive Vertical Sync | ||
| CUDA | ||
| GameStream | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| SLI | ||
| Surround | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 950 vs
ATIRadeon X700 PRO
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 950 vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 3870
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 950 vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 4830
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 950 vs
NVIDIAGRID K280Q
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 950 vs
NVIDIAQuadro K5200
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 950 vs
NVIDIAQuadro P1000 Mobile
