NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M versus AMD Radeon HD 8970M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M 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 970M
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 4 mois plus tard
- Environ 9% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 924 MHz versus 850 MHz
- Environ 22% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1038 MHz versus 850 MHz
- Environ 15% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 83.04 GTexel / s versus 72 GTexel / s
- Environ 15% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2,657 gflops versus 2,304 gflops
- Environ 23% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 81 Watt versus 100 Watt
- Environ 50% plus de taille maximale de mémoire: 6 GB versus 4 GB
- Environ 48% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 5724 versus 3876
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 59.428 versus 57.241
- 3.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8546 versus 2521
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3342 versus 2595
- 3.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8546 versus 2521
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3342 versus 2595
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 7 October 2014 versus 14 May 2013 |
Vitesse du noyau | 924 MHz versus 850 MHz |
Vitesse augmenté | 1038 MHz versus 850 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 83.04 GTexel / s versus 72 GTexel / s |
Performance á point flottant | 2,657 gflops versus 2,304 gflops |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 81 Watt versus 100 Watt |
Taille de mémore maximale | 6 GB versus 4 GB |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 5724 versus 3876 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 59.428 versus 57.241 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8546 versus 2521 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3699 versus 3688 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3342 versus 2595 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8546 versus 2521 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3699 versus 3688 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3342 versus 2595 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon HD 8970M
- Environ 92% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 4800 MHz versus 2500 MHz
- 2.1x meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 807 versus 388
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 20588 versus 19018
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1223.742 versus 1113.788
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.78 versus 4.157
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 89.306 versus 39.101
- 3.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 268.643 versus 81.909
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse de mémoire | 4800 MHz versus 2500 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 807 versus 388 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 20588 versus 19018 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1223.742 versus 1113.788 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.78 versus 4.157 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 89.306 versus 39.101 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 268.643 versus 81.909 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M
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 970M | AMD Radeon HD 8970M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 5724 | 3876 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 388 | 807 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 19018 | 20588 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 59.428 | 57.241 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1113.788 | 1223.742 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.157 | 5.78 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 39.101 | 89.306 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 81.909 | 268.643 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8546 | 2521 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3699 | 3688 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3342 | 2595 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8546 | 2521 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3699 | 3688 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3342 | 2595 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2286 | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M | AMD Radeon HD 8970M | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
Nom de code | GM204 | Neptune |
Date de sortie | 7 October 2014 | 14 May 2013 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $2,560.89 | |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 558 | 556 |
Prix maintenant | $1,899 | |
Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 3.99 | |
Conception | AMD Radeon HD 8000M Series | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1038 MHz | 850 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 924 MHz | 850 MHz |
Noyaux CUDA | 1280 | |
Performance á point flottant | 2,657 gflops | 2,304 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 1280 | 1280 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 83.04 GTexel / s | 72 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 81 Watt | 100 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 5,200 million | 2,800 million |
Unités de Compute | 20 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
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 | large |
Options SLI | 1 | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 11 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 6 GB | 4 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 120 GB / s | 153.6 GB/s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 192 Bit | 256 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 2500 MHz | 4800 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
Ansel | ||
BatteryBoost | ||
CUDA | ||
DSR | ||
GameStream | ||
GameWorks | ||
GeForce Experience | ||
GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
GPU Boost | ||
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
Optimus | ||
SLI | ||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
PowerTune | ||
ZeroCore |