NVIDIA Quadro 2000D versus AMD Radeon HD 6770
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro 2000D and AMD Radeon HD 6770 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 Quadro 2000D
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 8 mois plus tard
- Environ 74% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 62 Watt versus 108 Watt
- 2.5x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 2600 MHz versus 1050 MHz
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 328 versus 313
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 3925 versus 3799
- Environ 15% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 11.122 versus 9.69
- Environ 51% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3447 versus 2279
- Environ 51% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3447 versus 2279
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 5 October 2011 versus 21 January 2011 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 62 Watt versus 108 Watt |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 2600 MHz versus 1050 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 328 versus 313 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3925 versus 3799 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 11.122 versus 9.69 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3447 versus 2279 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3447 versus 2279 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon HD 6770
- Environ 70% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 34.0 GTexel / s versus 20 GTexel / s
- 4.2x plus de pipelines: 800 versus 192
- 2.8x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,360.0 gflops versus 480.0 gflops
- Environ 28% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1250 versus 976
- Environ 92% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 615.217 versus 320.57
- 2.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 26.748 versus 12.67
- 3.7x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 115.157 versus 31.168
- Environ 75% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2546 versus 1453
- Environ 75% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2546 versus 1453
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 34.0 GTexel / s versus 20 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 800 versus 192 |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,360.0 gflops versus 480.0 gflops |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1250 versus 976 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 615.217 versus 320.57 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 26.748 versus 12.67 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 115.157 versus 31.168 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2546 versus 1453 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 3353 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2546 versus 1453 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 3353 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro 2000D
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 6770
| 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 - 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 Quadro 2000D | AMD Radeon HD 6770 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 976 | 1250 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 328 | 313 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3925 | 3799 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 11.122 | 9.69 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 320.57 | 615.217 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0 | 1.004 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 12.67 | 26.748 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 31.168 | 115.157 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1453 | 2546 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3447 | 2279 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 | 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1453 | 2546 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3447 | 2279 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 | 3358 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Quadro 2000D | AMD Radeon HD 6770 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Fermi | TeraScale 2 |
| Nom de code | GF106 | Juniper |
| Date de sortie | 5 October 2011 | 21 January 2011 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $599 | $129 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1127 | 1130 |
| Prix maintenant | $209 | $76.99 |
| Genre | Workstation | Desktop |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 7.27 | 27.17 |
| Conception | AMD Radeon HD 6000 Series | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse du noyau | 625 MHz | |
| Performance á point flottant | 480.0 gflops | 1,360.0 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 40 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 192 | 800 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 20 GTexel / s | 34.0 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 62 Watt | 108 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,170 million | 1,040 million |
| Vitesse augmenté | 900 MHz | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 2x DVI | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 178 mm | 198 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 1x 6-pin |
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 2.0 x16 | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 11 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 1 GB | 1 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 41.6 GB / s | 76.8 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 2600 MHz | 1050 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| CrossFire | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA Quadro 2000D avec des autres
NVIDIAQuadro 2000D vs
AMDRadeon HD 6770
NVIDIAQuadro 2000D vs
AMDRadeon E6760
NVIDIAQuadro 2000D vs
NVIDIATesla M2050
NVIDIAQuadro 2000D vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 760M
NVIDIAQuadro 2000D vs
AMDRadeon R9 M275X
NVIDIAQuadro 2000D vs
IntelHD Graphics 6000
