NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M versus ATI Radeon HD 5850
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M and ATI Radeon HD 5850 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 960M
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 5 ans 5 mois plus tard
- Environ 51% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1096 MHz versus 725 MHz
- Environ 62% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1176 MHz versus 725 MHz
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 28 nm versus 40 nm
- 2x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 75 Watt versus 151 Watt
- 4x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 4 GB versus 1 GB
- Environ 71% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3368 versus 1969
- 3.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 54.294 versus 16.467
- 2.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.692 versus 1.541
- Environ 23% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 51.794 versus 42.08
- Environ 38% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5264 versus 3806
- Environ 38% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5264 versus 3806
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 13 March 2015 versus 30 September 2009 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1096 MHz versus 725 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1176 MHz versus 725 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm versus 40 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt versus 151 Watt |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 4 GB versus 1 GB |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3368 versus 1969 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 54.294 versus 16.467 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.692 versus 1.541 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 51.794 versus 42.08 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5264 versus 3806 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5264 versus 3806 |
Raisons pour considerer le ATI Radeon HD 5850
- Environ 11% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 52.2 GTexel / s versus 47.04 GTexel / s
- 2.3x plus de pipelines: 1440 versus 640
- Environ 39% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2,088.0 gflops versus 1,505 gflops
- Environ 60% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 4000 MHz versus 2500 MHz
- Environ 66% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 407 versus 245
- 3.1x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 33977 versus 11003
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1109.612 versus 795.325
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 52.2 GTexel / s versus 47.04 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1440 versus 640 |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,088.0 gflops versus 1,505 gflops |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4000 MHz versus 2500 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 407 versus 245 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 33977 versus 11003 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1109.612 versus 795.325 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 versus 3714 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 versus 3714 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
GPU 2: ATI Radeon HD 5850
| 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) |
|
|
||||
| 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 960M | ATI Radeon HD 5850 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3368 | 1969 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 245 | 407 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 11003 | 33977 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 54.294 | 16.467 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 795.325 | 1109.612 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.692 | 1.541 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 51.794 | 42.08 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 174.513 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5264 | 3806 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 | 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5264 | 3806 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 | 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3358 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1231 | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M | ATI Radeon HD 5850 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | TeraScale 2 |
| Nom de code | GM107 | Cypress |
| Date de sortie | 13 March 2015 | 30 September 2009 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 761 | 764 |
| Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
| Conception | ATI Radeon HD 5000 Series | |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $299 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1176 MHz | 725 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1096 MHz | 725 MHz |
| Noyaux CUDA | 640 | |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,505 gflops | 2,088.0 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 640 | 1440 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 47.04 GTexel / s | 52.2 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 151 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,870 million | 2,154 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| Soutien de DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) | 1 | |
| HDMI | ||
| Soutien de l’écran analog VGA | 1 | |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
| Longeur | 241 mm | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 2x 6-pin | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 11 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 1 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 80 GB / s | 128.0 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 2500 MHz | 4000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| Adaptive VSync | ||
| Ansel | ||
| BatteryBoost | ||
| CUDA | ||
| DSR | ||
| GameStream | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
| Optimus | ||
| SLI | ||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960M vs
ATIRadeon HD 5850
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960M vs
ATIRadeon HD 4290 IGP
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960M vs
NVIDIATesla C2070
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960M vs
AMDRadeon HD 8970 OEM
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960M vs
AMDRadeon 630
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960M vs
IntelUHD Graphics 750
