NVIDIA GeForce MX250 versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce MX250 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 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 6 ans 5 mois plus tard
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 28 nm
- 14x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 10 Watt versus 140 Watt
- 1001.3x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 6008 MHz versus 6.0 GB/s
- Environ 54% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 46.992 versus 30.505
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 44.7 versus 35.416
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 141.816 versus 62.69
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4027 versus 3581
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3710 versus 3690
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4027 versus 3581
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3710 versus 3690
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 21 February 2019 versus 6 September 2012 |
Vitesse augmenté | 1038 MHz versus 1033 MHz |
Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 Watt versus 140 Watt |
Vitesse de mémoire | 6008 MHz versus 6.0 GB/s |
Référence | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 46.992 versus 30.505 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 44.7 versus 35.416 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 141.816 versus 62.69 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4027 versus 3581 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3710 versus 3690 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4027 versus 3581 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3710 versus 3690 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660
- Environ 5% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 980 MHz versus 937 MHz
- 2.5x plus de pipelines: 960 versus 384
- Environ 67% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 4007 versus 2403
- 2x meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 481 versus 240
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 11363 versus 9280
- Environ 32% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 705.293 versus 535.24
- Environ 17% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.085 versus 2.64
- Environ 47% meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1308 versus 888
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 980 MHz versus 937 MHz |
Pipelines | 960 versus 384 |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 4007 versus 2403 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 481 versus 240 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 11363 versus 9280 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 705.293 versus 535.24 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.085 versus 2.64 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3365 versus 3357 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3365 versus 3357 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1308 versus 888 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce MX250
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660
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 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2403 | 4007 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 240 | 481 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 9280 | 11363 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 46.992 | 30.505 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 535.24 | 705.293 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.64 | 3.085 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 44.7 | 35.416 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 141.816 | 62.69 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4027 | 3581 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3710 | 3690 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 | 3365 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4027 | 3581 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3710 | 3690 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 | 3365 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 888 | 1308 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA GeForce MX250 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Pascal | Kepler |
Nom de code | GP108B | GK106 |
Date de sortie | 21 February 2019 | 6 September 2012 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 902 | 776 |
Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $229 | |
Prix maintenant | $349.99 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 14.35 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1038 MHz | 1033 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 937 MHz | 980 MHz |
Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 384 | 960 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 Watt | 140 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 1,800 million | 2,540 million |
Noyaux CUDA | 960 | |
Performance á point flottant | 1,981 gflops | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 78.4 billion / sec | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI..., 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
Contribution d’audio pour HDMI | Internal | |
Soutien de G-SYNC | ||
HDCP | ||
HDMI | ||
Résolution VGA maximale | 2048x1536 | |
Soutien de plusiers moniteurs | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | One 6-pin |
Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0 | |
Hauteur | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
Longeur | 9.5" (24.1 cm) | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.3 |
Mémoire |
||
Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 Bit | 192-bit GDDR5 |
Vitesse de mémoire | 6008 MHz | 6.0 GB/s |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
RAM maximale | 2 GB | |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 144.2 GB / s | |
Technologies |
||
3D Blu-Ray | ||
3D Gaming | ||
3D Vision | ||
Adaptive VSync | ||
CUDA | ||
FXAA | ||
GPU Boost | ||
SLI | ||
TXAA |