NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M versus AMD FirePro S9000
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M and AMD FirePro S9000 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 2 ans 4 mois plus tard
- Environ 5% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 944 MHz versus 900 MHz
- 7x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 50 Watt versus 350 Watt
- 7.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 67.59 versus 9.541
- 2.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 720.592 versus 275.278
- 2.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.903 versus 1.886
- Environ 93% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 57.947 versus 30.049
- 2.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 223.296 versus 91.842
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 9 January 2015 versus 24 August 2012 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 944 MHz versus 900 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt versus 350 Watt |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 67.59 versus 9.541 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 720.592 versus 275.278 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.903 versus 1.886 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 57.947 versus 30.049 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 223.296 versus 91.842 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD FirePro S9000
- Environ 37% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 100.8 GTexel / s versus 73.6 GTexel / s
- Environ 75% de pipelines plus haut: 1792 versus 1024
- Environ 37% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 3,226 gflops versus 2,355 gflops
- 3x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 6 GB versus 2 GB
- 2.2x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 5500 MHz versus 2500 MHz
- Environ 32% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 5059 versus 3825
- Environ 62% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 561 versus 347
- Environ 44% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3707 versus 2566
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3357 versus 3337
- Environ 44% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3707 versus 2566
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3357 versus 3337
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 100.8 GTexel / s versus 73.6 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1792 versus 1024 |
| Performance á point flottant | 3,226 gflops versus 2,355 gflops |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 6 GB versus 2 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5500 MHz versus 2500 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 5059 versus 3825 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 561 versus 347 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3707 versus 2566 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 versus 3337 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3707 versus 2566 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 versus 3337 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M
GPU 2: AMD FirePro S9000
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| 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 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Nom | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M | AMD FirePro S9000 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3825 | 5059 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 347 | 561 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 14467 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 67.59 | 9.541 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 720.592 | 275.278 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.903 | 1.886 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 57.947 | 30.049 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 223.296 | 91.842 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5783 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2566 | 3707 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3337 | 3357 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5783 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2566 | 3707 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3337 | 3357 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1831 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M | AMD FirePro S9000 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Nom de code | GM204 | Tahiti |
| Date de sortie | 9 January 2015 | 24 August 2012 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 684 | 687 |
| Genre | Laptop | Workstation |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $2,499 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 950 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 944 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Noyaux CUDA | 1024 | |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,355 gflops | 3,226 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 1024 | 1792 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 73.6 GTexel / s | 100.8 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 350 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 5,200 million | 4,313 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 1x DisplayPort |
| Soutien de DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) | 1 | |
| Soutien de G-SYNC | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Soutien de l’écran analog VGA | 1 | |
| Compte DisplayPort | 1 | |
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Taille du laptop | large | |
| Options SLI | 1 | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 1x 8-pin |
| Facteur de forme | Full Height / Full Length | |
| Longeur | 267 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 | 6 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 80 GB / s | 264 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 2500 MHz | 5500 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
AMDFirePro S9000
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 965M vs
AMDFirePro D300
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 965M vs
AMDFirePro W5170M
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 965M vs
AMDRadeon Pro 455
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 965M vs
AMDRadeon Instinct MI25 MxGPU
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 965M vs
IntelIris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU)
