NVIDIA Quadro K1200 versus NVIDIA Quadro K2200
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro K1200 and NVIDIA Quadro K2200 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 K1200
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 6 mois plus tard
- Environ 1% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1058 MHz versus 1046 MHz
- Environ 51% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 45 Watt versus 68 Watt
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 579 versus 547
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1721 versus 1577
- Environ 97% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3288 versus 1671
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1721 versus 1577
- Environ 97% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3288 versus 1671
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 28 January 2015 versus 22 July 2014 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1058 MHz versus 1046 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt versus 68 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 579 versus 547 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1721 versus 1577 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3288 versus 1671 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1721 versus 1577 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3288 versus 1671 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro K2200
- Environ 25% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 44.96 GTexel / s versus 35.97 GTexel / s
- Environ 25% de pipelines plus haut: 640 versus 512
- Environ 25% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,439 gflops versus 1,151 gflops
- Environ 21% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3567 versus 2948
- Environ 36% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 12020 versus 8821
- Environ 27% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 40.695 versus 31.949
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 588.094 versus 466.139
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.205 versus 2.629
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 30.455 versus 25.411
- Environ 41% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 166.26 versus 117.722
- Environ 21% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4921 versus 4080
- Environ 21% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4921 versus 4080
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 44.96 GTexel / s versus 35.97 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 640 versus 512 |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,439 gflops versus 1,151 gflops |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz versus 5000 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3567 versus 2948 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 12020 versus 8821 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 40.695 versus 31.949 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 588.094 versus 466.139 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.205 versus 2.629 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 30.455 versus 25.411 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 166.26 versus 117.722 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4921 versus 4080 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4921 versus 4080 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K1200
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K2200
| 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 K1200 | NVIDIA Quadro K2200 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2948 | 3567 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 579 | 547 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 8821 | 12020 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 31.949 | 40.695 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 466.139 | 588.094 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.629 | 3.205 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 25.411 | 30.455 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 117.722 | 166.26 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4080 | 4921 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1721 | 1577 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3288 | 1671 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4080 | 4921 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1721 | 1577 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3288 | 1671 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1193 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Quadro K1200 | NVIDIA Quadro K2200 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | Maxwell |
| Nom de code | GM107 | GM107 |
| Date de sortie | 28 January 2015 | 22 July 2014 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $321.97 | $395.75 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 804 | 805 |
| Prix maintenant | $289.99 | $343.99 |
| Genre | Workstation | Workstation |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 13.00 | 13.01 |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1124 MHz | 1124 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1058 MHz | 1046 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,151 gflops | 1,439 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 512 | 640 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 35.97 GTexel / s | 44.96 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt | 68 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,870 million | 1,870 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 4x mini-DisplayPort, mDP mDP mDP mDP | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort |
| Nombre d’écrans á la fois | 4 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 160 mm | 202 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
| Largeur | 1" (2.5 cm) | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 5 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5000 MHz | 5012 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | 128 Bit | GDDR5 |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 80.19 GB / s | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView Desktop Management | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA Quadro K1200 avec des autres
NVIDIAQuadro K1200 vs
ATIRadeon HD 4250
NVIDIAQuadro K1200 vs
NVIDIAQuadro K5000M
NVIDIAQuadro K1200 vs
AMDFirePro M4100
NVIDIAQuadro K1200 vs
NVIDIAQuadro K2200
NVIDIAQuadro K1200 vs
NVIDIAQuadro P500
NVIDIAQuadro K1200 vs
AMDRadeon RX 640
