NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M versus NVIDIA GRID K520
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M and NVIDIA GRID K520 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 1 ans 7 mois plus tard
- Environ 47% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1096 MHz versus 745 MHz
- 3x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 75 Watt versus 225 Watt
- Environ 53% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 245 versus 160
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 10976 versus 10864
- 2.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 54.294 versus 20.97
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.692 versus 3.244
- Environ 23% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 51.794 versus 42.277
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 174.513 versus 76.158
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 13 March 2015 versus 23 July 2013 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1096 MHz versus 745 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt versus 225 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 245 versus 160 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 10976 versus 10864 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 54.294 versus 20.97 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.692 versus 3.244 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 51.794 versus 42.277 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 174.513 versus 76.158 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 versus 3713 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 3354 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 versus 3713 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 3354 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GRID K520
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 2x 102.0 GTexel / s billion / sec versus 47.04 GTexel / s
- 4.8x plus de pipelines: 2x 1536 versus 640
- 3.3x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2x 2,448 gflops versus 1,505 gflops
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 2x 4 GB versus 4 GB
- 2x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 5000 MHz versus 2500 MHz
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3516 versus 3370
- Environ 34% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1063.784 versus 795.325
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6782 versus 5264
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6782 versus 5264
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 2x 102.0 GTexel / s billion / sec versus 47.04 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 2x 1536 versus 640 |
| Performance á point flottant | 2x 2,448 gflops versus 1,505 gflops |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 2x 4 GB versus 4 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5000 MHz versus 2500 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3516 versus 3370 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1063.784 versus 795.325 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6782 versus 5264 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6782 versus 5264 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GRID K520
| 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 960M | NVIDIA GRID K520 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3370 | 3516 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 245 | 160 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 10976 | 10864 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 54.294 | 20.97 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 795.325 | 1063.784 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.692 | 3.244 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 51.794 | 42.277 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 174.513 | 76.158 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5264 | 6782 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 | 3713 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3354 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5264 | 6782 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 | 3713 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3354 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1231 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M | NVIDIA GRID K520 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | Kepler |
| Nom de code | GM107 | GK104 |
| Date de sortie | 13 March 2015 | 23 July 2013 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 765 | 766 |
| Genre | Laptop | Workstation |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $3,599 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1176 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1096 MHz | 745 MHz |
| Noyaux CUDA | 640 | |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,505 gflops | 2x 2,448 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 640 | 2x 1536 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 47.04 GTexel / s | 2x 102.0 GTexel / s billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 225 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,870 million | 3,540 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
| Soutien de DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) | 1 | |
| HDMI | ||
| Soutien de l’écran analog VGA | 1 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
| Longeur | 267 mm | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 8-pin | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 2x 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 80 GB / s | 2x 160.0 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 2x 256 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 2500 MHz | 5000 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 | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960M vs
ATIRadeon X600 SE
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960M vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 660
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960M vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 780M
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960M vs
NVIDIAGRID K520
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960M vs
AMDRadeon R9 M470
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960M vs
IntelUHD Graphics 750
