NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M versus AMD FirePro D500
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M and AMD FirePro D500 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 965M
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 11 mois plus tard
- Environ 30% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 944 MHz versus 725 MHz
- Environ 6% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 73.6 GTexel / s versus 69.6 GTexel / s
- Environ 6% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2,355 gflops versus 2,227 gflops
- 5.5x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 50 Watt versus 274 Watt
- Environ 36% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 67.59 versus 49.776
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 9 January 2015 versus 18 January 2014 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 944 MHz versus 725 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 73.6 GTexel / s versus 69.6 GTexel / s |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,355 gflops versus 2,227 gflops |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt versus 274 Watt |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 67.59 versus 49.776 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD FirePro D500
- Environ 50% de pipelines plus haut: 1536 versus 1024
- Environ 50% plus de taille maximale de mémoire: 3 GB versus 2 GB
- 2x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 5080 MHz versus 2500 MHz
- Environ 24% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 17885 versus 14467
- Environ 48% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1063.081 versus 720.592
- Environ 17% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 4.568 versus 3.903
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 65.789 versus 57.947
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6020 versus 5783
- Environ 44% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3685 versus 2566
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6020 versus 5783
- Environ 44% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3685 versus 2566
| Caractéristiques | |
| Pipelines | 1536 versus 1024 |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 3 GB versus 2 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5080 MHz versus 2500 MHz |
| Référence | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 17885 versus 14467 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1063.081 versus 720.592 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.568 versus 3.903 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 65.789 versus 57.947 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6020 versus 5783 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3685 versus 2566 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3349 versus 3337 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6020 versus 5783 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3685 versus 2566 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3349 versus 3337 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M
GPU 2: AMD FirePro D500
| 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 965M | AMD FirePro D500 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3821 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 345 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 14467 | 17885 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 67.59 | 49.776 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 720.592 | 1063.081 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.903 | 4.568 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 57.947 | 65.789 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 223.296 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5783 | 6020 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2566 | 3685 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3337 | 3349 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5783 | 6020 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2566 | 3685 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3337 | 3349 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1831 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M | AMD FirePro D500 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Nom de code | GM204 | Tahiti |
| Date de sortie | 9 January 2015 | 18 January 2014 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 666 | 668 |
| Genre | Laptop | Workstation |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 950 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 944 MHz | 725 MHz |
| Noyaux CUDA | 1024 | |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,355 gflops | 2,227 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 1024 | 1536 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 73.6 GTexel / s | 69.6 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 274 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 5,200 million | 4,313 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 6x mini-DisplayPort, 1x SDI |
| Soutien de DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) | 1 | |
| Soutien de G-SYNC | ||
| 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 | large | |
| Options SLI | 1 | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
| Longeur | 279 mm | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_1) |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 3 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 80 GB / s | 243.8 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 2500 MHz | 5080 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| 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 965M avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 965M vs
NVIDIAQuadro K5000
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 965M vs
AMDFirePro D500
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 965M vs
AMDRadeon R7 M270DX
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 965M vs
AMDRadeon RX Vega 8 Mobile
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 965M vs
AMDRadeon R9 A375
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 965M vs
IntelArc Pro A40
