NVIDIA Quadro K2000 versus NVIDIA GeForce GT 625M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro K2000 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 625M 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 K2000
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 5 mois plus tard
- 4x plus de pipelines: 384 versus 96
- 3.1x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 732.7 gflops versus 240.0 gflops
- 2.2x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 4000 MHz versus 1800 MHz
- 3.2x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1578 versus 497
- 2.7x meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 385 versus 142
- Environ 83% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 4071 versus 2229
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2446 versus 999
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2446 versus 999
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 1 March 2013 versus 1 October 2012 |
| Pipelines | 384 versus 96 |
| Performance á point flottant | 732.7 gflops versus 240.0 gflops |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4000 MHz versus 1800 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1578 versus 497 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 385 versus 142 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 4071 versus 2229 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2446 versus 999 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2446 versus 999 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GT 625M
- 3.4x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 15 Watt versus 51 Watt
- Environ 43% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2333 versus 1631
- Environ 65% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3257 versus 1974
- Environ 43% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2333 versus 1631
- Environ 65% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3257 versus 1974
| Caractéristiques | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt versus 51 Watt |
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2333 versus 1631 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3257 versus 1974 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2333 versus 1631 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3257 versus 1974 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K2000
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 625M
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| 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 K2000 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 625M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1578 | 497 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 385 | 142 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 4071 | 2229 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 14.332 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 265.424 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.093 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 15.009 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 38.219 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2446 | 999 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1631 | 2333 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1974 | 3257 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2446 | 999 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1631 | 2333 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1974 | 3257 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Quadro K2000 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 625M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Kepler | Fermi 2.0 |
| Nom de code | GK107 | GF117 |
| Date de sortie | 1 March 2013 | 1 October 2012 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $599 | |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1206 | 1207 |
| Prix maintenant | $164.99 | |
| Genre | Workstation | Laptop |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 11.74 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse du noyau | 954 MHz | |
| Performance á point flottant | 732.7 gflops | 240.0 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | 96 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 30.53 GTexel / s | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 51 Watt | 15 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,270 million | 585 million |
| Noyaux CUDA | 96 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| HDCP | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Résolution VGA maximale | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 202 mm | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
| Soutien de bus | PCI Express 2.0 | |
| Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12 API |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Vulkan | ||
| OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 64 GB / s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4000 MHz | 1800 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | DDR3 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Blu-Ray | ||
| CUDA | ||
| DirectCompute | ||
| DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
| Optimus | ||


