NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A versus AMD Radeon HD 8970M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A 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: 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 960A
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 9 mois plus tard
- Environ 21% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1029 MHz versus 850 MHz
- Environ 28% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1085 MHz versus 850 MHz
- Environ 33% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 75 Watt versus 100 Watt
- Environ 4% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 5012 MHz versus 4800 MHz
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5157 versus 2521
- Environ 58% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 5834 versus 3688
- 3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 7859 versus 2595
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5157 versus 2521
- Environ 58% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 5834 versus 3688
- 3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 7859 versus 2595
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 13 March 2015 versus 14 May 2013 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1029 MHz versus 850 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1085 MHz versus 850 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt versus 100 Watt |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz versus 4800 MHz |
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5157 versus 2521 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 5834 versus 3688 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 7859 versus 2595 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5157 versus 2521 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 5834 versus 3688 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 7859 versus 2595 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon HD 8970M
- Environ 66% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 72 GTexel / s versus 43.4 GTexel / s
- 2x plus de pipelines: 1280 versus 640
- Environ 66% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2,304 gflops versus 1,389 gflops
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 4 GB versus 2 GB
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3876 versus 3465
- 2.6x meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 807 versus 312
- Environ 65% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 20588 versus 12495
- Environ 15% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 57.241 versus 49.772
- Environ 62% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1223.742 versus 757.295
- Environ 57% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.78 versus 3.67
- Environ 79% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 89.306 versus 49.875
- Environ 50% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 268.643 versus 179.567
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 72 GTexel / s versus 43.4 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1280 versus 640 |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,304 gflops versus 1,389 gflops |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 4 GB versus 2 GB |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3876 versus 3465 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 807 versus 312 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 20588 versus 12495 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 57.241 versus 49.772 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1223.742 versus 757.295 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.78 versus 3.67 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 89.306 versus 49.875 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 268.643 versus 179.567 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 8970M
| 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 960A | AMD Radeon HD 8970M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3465 | 3876 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 312 | 807 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 12495 | 20588 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 49.772 | 57.241 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 757.295 | 1223.742 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.67 | 5.78 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 49.875 | 89.306 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 179.567 | 268.643 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5157 | 2521 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 5834 | 3688 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 7859 | 2595 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5157 | 2521 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 5834 | 3688 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 7859 | 2595 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A | AMD Radeon HD 8970M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | GCN 1.0 |
| Nom de code | GM107 | Neptune |
| Date de sortie | 13 March 2015 | 14 May 2013 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 553 | 555 |
| Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
| Conception | AMD Radeon HD 8000M Series | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1085 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1029 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,389 gflops | 2,304 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 640 | 1280 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 43.4 GTexel / s | 72 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,870 million | 2,800 million |
| Unités de Compute | 20 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Taille du laptop | large | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 11 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 80.19 GB / s | 153.6 GB/s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 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 960A avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960A vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 540
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960A vs
AMDRadeon HD 8970M
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960A vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960A vs
AMDRadeon R9 370X
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960A vs
AMDRadeon Pro 560X
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960A vs
NVIDIACMP 50HX
