NVIDIA Quadro K1200 versus NVIDIA Quadro K5000M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro K1200 and NVIDIA Quadro K5000M 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).
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro K1200
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 5 mois plus tard
- Environ 76% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1058 MHz versus 601 MHz
- 2.2x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 45 Watt versus 100 Watt
- Environ 67% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 5000 MHz versus 3000 MHz
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 2941 versus 2779
- Environ 63% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 580 versus 355
- Environ 73% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 8814 versus 5107
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 31.949 versus 24.713
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.629 versus 2.189
- Environ 71% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 117.722 versus 68.712
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 28 January 2015 versus 7 August 2012 |
Vitesse du noyau | 1058 MHz versus 601 MHz |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt versus 100 Watt |
Vitesse de mémoire | 5000 MHz versus 3000 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2941 versus 2779 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 580 versus 355 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 8814 versus 5107 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 31.949 versus 24.713 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.629 versus 2.189 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 117.722 versus 68.712 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro K5000M
- Environ 87% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 67.31 GTexel / s versus 35.97 GTexel / s
- 2.6x plus de pipelines: 1344 versus 512
- Environ 40% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,615 gflops versus 1,151 gflops
- Environ 47% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 685.1 versus 466.139
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 28.929 versus 25.411
- Environ 18% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4825 versus 4080
- 2.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3712 versus 1721
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3353 versus 3288
- Environ 18% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4825 versus 4080
- 2.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3712 versus 1721
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3353 versus 3288
Caractéristiques | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 67.31 GTexel / s versus 35.97 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 1344 versus 512 |
Performance á point flottant | 1,615 gflops versus 1,151 gflops |
Référence | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 685.1 versus 466.139 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 28.929 versus 25.411 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4825 versus 4080 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3712 versus 1721 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 versus 3288 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4825 versus 4080 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3712 versus 1721 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 versus 3288 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K1200
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K5000M
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 K5000M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2941 | 2779 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 580 | 355 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 8814 | 5107 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 31.949 | 24.713 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 466.139 | 685.1 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.629 | 2.189 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 25.411 | 28.929 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 117.722 | 68.712 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4080 | 4825 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1721 | 3712 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3288 | 3353 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4080 | 4825 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1721 | 3712 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3288 | 3353 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA Quadro K1200 | NVIDIA Quadro K5000M | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Maxwell | Kepler |
Nom de code | GM107 | GK104 |
Date de sortie | 28 January 2015 | 7 August 2012 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $321.97 | $329.99 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 802 | 805 |
Prix maintenant | $289.99 | $391 |
Genre | Workstation | Mobile workstation |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 13.00 | 8.47 |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1124 MHz | |
Vitesse du noyau | 1058 MHz | 601 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 1,151 gflops | 1,615 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 512 | 1344 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 35.97 GTexel / s | 67.31 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt | 100 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 1,870 million | 3,540 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | 4x mini-DisplayPort, mDP mDP mDP mDP | No outputs |
Nombre d’écrans á la fois | 4 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
Longeur | 160 mm | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Largeur | 1" (2.5 cm) | |
Taille du laptop | large | |
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 | 256 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 5000 MHz | 3000 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | 128 Bit | GDDR5 |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 96 GB / s | |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision Pro | ||
Mosaic | ||
nView Desktop Management |