NVIDIA NVS 5400M versus NVIDIA GeForce GT 630
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA NVS 5400M and NVIDIA GeForce GT 630 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 NVS 5400M
- Environ 86% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 35 Watt versus 65 Watt
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 2 GB versus 1 GB
- Environ 64% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 229.562 versus 140.06
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.635 versus 0.502
- Environ 18% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 11.384 versus 9.613
- Environ 58% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 19.696 versus 12.49
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2282 versus 2073
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2282 versus 2073
| Caractéristiques | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt versus 65 Watt |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 2 GB versus 1 GB |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 229.562 versus 140.06 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.635 versus 0.502 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 11.384 versus 9.613 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 19.696 versus 12.49 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2282 versus 2073 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2282 versus 2073 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GT 630
- Environ 23% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 810 MHz versus 660 MHz
- Environ 23% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 12.96 GTexel / s versus 10.56 GTexel / s
- Environ 23% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 311.0 gflops versus 253.4 gflops
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 681 versus 620
- Environ 21% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 225 versus 186
- Environ 16% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 2473 versus 2127
- Environ 28% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 6.498 versus 5.068
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1151 versus 1069
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1853 versus 1652
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1151 versus 1069
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1853 versus 1652
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 810 MHz versus 660 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 12.96 GTexel / s versus 10.56 GTexel / s |
| Performance á point flottant | 311.0 gflops versus 253.4 gflops |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 681 versus 620 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 225 versus 186 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 2473 versus 2127 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 6.498 versus 5.068 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1151 versus 1069 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1853 versus 1652 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1151 versus 1069 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1853 versus 1652 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA NVS 5400M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 630
| 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 NVS 5400M | NVIDIA GeForce GT 630 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 620 | 681 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 186 | 225 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 2127 | 2473 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 5.068 | 6.498 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 229.562 | 140.06 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.635 | 0.502 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 11.384 | 9.613 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 19.696 | 12.49 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1069 | 1151 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1652 | 1853 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2282 | 2073 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1069 | 1151 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1652 | 1853 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2282 | 2073 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 170 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA NVS 5400M | NVIDIA GeForce GT 630 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Fermi | Fermi |
| Nom de code | GF108 | GF108 |
| Date de sortie | 1 June 2012 | 15 May 2012 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1439 | 1440 |
| Genre | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $99.99 | |
| Prix maintenant | $99.21 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 8.89 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse du noyau | 660 MHz | 810 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 253.4 gflops | 311.0 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 40 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 96 | 96 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 10.56 GTexel / s | 12.96 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt | 65 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 585 million | 585 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | MXM | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
| Longeur | 145 mm | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 1 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 28.8 GB / s | 28.8 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1800 MHz | 1800 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision | ||
| 3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
| CUDA | ||
| DirectCompute | ||
| DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
| Optimus | ||
