NVIDIA GeForce MX250 versus AMD Radeon RX 550
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce MX250 and AMD Radeon RX 550 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 MX250
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 10 mois plus tard
- 5x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 10 Watt versus 50 Watt
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 46.992 versus 33.507
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 141.816 versus 140.911
- 3.9x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3710 versus 940
- Environ 56% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3357 versus 2158
- 3.9x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3710 versus 940
- Environ 56% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3357 versus 2158
- 7x meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 888 versus 127
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 21 February 2019 versus 18 April 2017 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 Watt versus 50 Watt |
Référence | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 46.992 versus 33.507 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 141.816 versus 140.911 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3710 versus 940 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 versus 2158 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3710 versus 940 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 versus 2158 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 888 versus 127 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon RX 550
- Environ 17% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1100 MHz versus 937 MHz
- Environ 14% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1183 MHz versus 1038 MHz
- Environ 33% de pipelines plus haut: 512 versus 384
- Environ 17% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 7000 MHz versus 6008 MHz
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 2717 versus 2399
- Environ 99% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 478 versus 240
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 11659 versus 9257
- Environ 94% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1037.305 versus 535.24
- Environ 16% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.064 versus 2.64
- Environ 18% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 52.533 versus 44.7
- Environ 11% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4485 versus 4027
- Environ 11% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4485 versus 4027
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 1100 MHz versus 937 MHz |
Vitesse augmenté | 1183 MHz versus 1038 MHz |
Pipelines | 512 versus 384 |
Vitesse de mémoire | 7000 MHz versus 6008 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2717 versus 2399 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 478 versus 240 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 11659 versus 9257 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1037.305 versus 535.24 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.064 versus 2.64 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 52.533 versus 44.7 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4485 versus 4027 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4485 versus 4027 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce MX250
GPU 2: AMD Radeon RX 550
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 MX250 | AMD Radeon RX 550 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2399 | 2717 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 240 | 478 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 9257 | 11659 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 46.992 | 33.507 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 535.24 | 1037.305 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.64 | 3.064 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 44.7 | 52.533 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 141.816 | 140.911 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4027 | 4485 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3710 | 940 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 | 2158 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4027 | 4485 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3710 | 940 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 | 2158 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 888 | 127 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA GeForce MX250 | AMD Radeon RX 550 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Pascal | GCN 4.0 |
Nom de code | GP108B | Lexa |
Date de sortie | 21 February 2019 | 18 April 2017 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 886 | 889 |
Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
Conception | Radeon RX 500 Series | |
Génération GCN | 4th Gen | |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $79 | |
Prix maintenant | $75 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 59.51 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1038 MHz | 1183 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 937 MHz | 1100 MHz |
Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 14 nm |
Pipelines | 384 | 512 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 Watt | 50 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 1,800 million | 2,200 million |
Performance á point flottant | 1.2 TFLOPs | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 37.86 GTexel / s | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
HDMI | ||
VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
Longeur | 145 mm | |
Énergie du systeme recommandé (PSU) | 400 Watt | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 | 12 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
OpenCL | 2.0 | |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 Bit | 128 bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 6008 MHz | 7000 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
RAM maximale | 4 GB | |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 112 GB/s | |
Technologies |
||
4K H264 Decode | ||
4K H264 Encode | ||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
AMD Radeon™ Chill | ||
AMD Radeon™ ReLive | ||
AppAcceleration | ||
FreeSync | ||
H265/HEVC Decode | ||
H265/HEVC Encode | ||
HDMI 4K Support | ||
LiquidVR | ||
PowerTune | ||
TrueAudio | ||
Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
Virtual Super Resolution (VSR) |