NVIDIA Quadro K1100M versus NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro K1100M and NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M 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 K1100M
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 3 mois plus tard
- Environ 82% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 22.59 GTexel / s versus 12.4 GTexel / s
- 4x plus de pipelines: 384 versus 96
- 2.3x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 542.2 gflops versus 240.0 gflops
- Environ 75% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 2800 MHz versus 1600 MHz
- 2.4x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1091 versus 459
- 2.1x meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 253 versus 119
- Environ 16% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 3025 versus 2610
- Environ 25% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 8.649 versus 6.901
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 174.555 versus 146.913
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.642 versus 0.587
- Environ 16% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 11.732 versus 10.121
- Environ 81% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1892 versus 1047
- Environ 81% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1892 versus 1047
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 23 July 2013 versus 1 April 2013 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 22.59 GTexel / s versus 12.4 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 384 versus 96 |
Performance á point flottant | 542.2 gflops versus 240.0 gflops |
Vitesse de mémoire | 2800 MHz versus 1600 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1091 versus 459 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 253 versus 119 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3025 versus 2610 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 8.649 versus 6.901 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 174.555 versus 146.913 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.642 versus 0.587 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 11.732 versus 10.121 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1892 versus 1047 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1892 versus 1047 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M
- Environ 10% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 775 MHz versus 706 MHz
- Environ 36% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 33 Watt versus 45 Watt
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 22.755 versus 16.3
- 3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2570 versus 861
- Environ 41% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2035 versus 1443
- 3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2570 versus 861
- Environ 41% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2035 versus 1443
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 775 MHz versus 706 MHz |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 33 Watt versus 45 Watt |
Référence | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 22.755 versus 16.3 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2570 versus 861 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2035 versus 1443 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2570 versus 861 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2035 versus 1443 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K1100M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M
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 Quadro K1100M | NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1091 | 459 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 253 | 119 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3025 | 2610 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 8.649 | 6.901 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 174.555 | 146.913 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.642 | 0.587 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 11.732 | 10.121 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 16.3 | 22.755 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1892 | 1047 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 861 | 2570 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1443 | 2035 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1892 | 1047 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 861 | 2570 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1443 | 2035 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA Quadro K1100M | NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Kepler | Fermi 2.0 |
Nom de code | GK107 | GF117 |
Date de sortie | 23 July 2013 | 1 April 2013 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $109.94 | |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1441 | 1443 |
Prix maintenant | $79 | |
Genre | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 17.59 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse du noyau | 706 MHz | 775 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 542.2 gflops | 240.0 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 384 | 96 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 22.59 GTexel / s | 12.4 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt | 33 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 1,270 million | 585 million |
Vitesse augmenté | 938 MHz | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Display Port | 1.2 | |
Audio HD reseau 7.1 sur HDMI | ||
Soutien de DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) | Up to 2560x1600 | |
Soutien du signal sDP 1.2 | Up to 2560x1600 | |
Protection du contenu HDCP | ||
HDMI | ||
Support du signale LVDS | Up to 1920x1200 | |
Bitstreaming d’audio TrueHD et DTS-HD | ||
Soutien de l’écran analog VGA | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Taille du laptop | medium sized | medium sized |
Soutien de bus | PCI Express 2.0 | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12 | 12 API |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Shader Model | 5 | |
Vulkan | ||
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 2 GB | 2 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 44.8 GB / s | 12.8 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 2800 MHz | 1600 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | DDR3 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | 0 |
Configuration standard de la mémoire | DDR3 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision Pro | ||
Mosaic | ||
nView Display Management | ||
Optimus | ||
Blu-Ray 3D Support | ||
CUDA | ||
Direct Compute | ||
FXAA | ||
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder |