NVIDIA GeForce MX130 versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce MX130 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 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 MX130
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 9 mois plus tard
- Environ 5% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1242 MHz versus 1178 MHz
- 4x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 30 Watt versus 120 Watt
- 716x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 5012 MHz versus 7.0 GB/s
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3357 versus 3335
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3357 versus 3335
- 3.9x meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 632 versus 162
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 17 November 2017 versus 22 January 2015 |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1242 MHz versus 1178 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt versus 120 Watt |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz versus 7.0 GB/s |
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 versus 3335 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 versus 3335 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 632 versus 162 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 72 billion / sec versus 29.81 GTexel / s
- 2.7x plus de pipelines: 1024 versus 384
- 2.5x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2,413 gflops versus 953.9 gflops
- 3.4x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 6111 versus 1814
- 3.5x meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 673 versus 195
- 2.9x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 18734 versus 6461
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 73.733 versus 31.613
- Environ 95% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 792.44 versus 406.203
- 2.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 4.888 versus 2.034
- Environ 17% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 35.338 versus 30.251
- Environ 87% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 200.825 versus 107.608
- 2.6x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 7218 versus 2796
- 2.6x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 7218 versus 2796
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1127 MHz versus 1122 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 72 billion / sec versus 29.81 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1024 versus 384 |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,413 gflops versus 953.9 gflops |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6111 versus 1814 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 673 versus 195 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 18734 versus 6461 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 73.733 versus 31.613 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 792.44 versus 406.203 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.888 versus 2.034 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 35.338 versus 30.251 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 200.825 versus 107.608 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7218 versus 2796 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3691 versus 3686 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7218 versus 2796 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3691 versus 3686 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce MX130
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960
| 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 |
|
|
| Nom | NVIDIA GeForce MX130 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1814 | 6111 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 195 | 673 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 6461 | 18734 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 31.613 | 73.733 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 406.203 | 792.44 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.034 | 4.888 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 30.251 | 35.338 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 107.608 | 200.825 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2796 | 7218 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3686 | 3691 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 | 3335 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2796 | 7218 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3686 | 3691 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 | 3335 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 632 | 162 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce MX130 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Nom de code | GM108 | GM206 |
| Date de sortie | 17 November 2017 | 22 January 2015 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1013 | 514 |
| Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $199 | |
| Prix maintenant | $229.99 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 34.63 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1242 MHz | 1178 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1122 MHz | 1127 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 953.9 gflops | 2,413 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | 1024 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 29.81 GTexel / s | 72 billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt | 120 Watt |
| Noyaux CUDA | 1024 | |
| Compte de transistor | 2,940 million | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2, 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort |
| Contribution d’audio pour HDMI | Internal | |
| HDCP | ||
| Résolution VGA maximale | 2048x1536 | |
| Soutien de plusiers moniteurs | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 1x 6-pins |
| Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Hauteur | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
| Longeur | 9.5" (24.1 cm) | |
| Énergie du systeme recommandé (PSU) | 400 Watt | |
| Options SLI | 2x | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 40.1 GB / s | 112 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz | 7.0 GB/s |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 / DDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
| CUDA | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| Optimus | ||
| GameStream | ||
| GeForce ShadowPlay | ||

