NVIDIA Quadro K2000D versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro K2000D and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire. 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 K2000D
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 0 mois plus tard
- Environ 30% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 954 MHz versus 736 MHz
- Environ 33% de pipelines plus haut: 384 versus 288
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 28 nm versus 40 nm
- 2.9x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 51 Watt versus 150 Watt
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 2 GB versus 1 GB
- Environ 4% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 4000 MHz versus 3828 MHz
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3493 versus 3114
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3493 versus 3114
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 1 March 2013 versus 20 February 2012 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 954 MHz versus 736 MHz |
| Pipelines | 384 versus 288 |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm versus 40 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 51 Watt versus 150 Watt |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 2 GB versus 1 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4000 MHz versus 3828 MHz |
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3493 versus 3114 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3493 versus 3114 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE
- Environ 16% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 35.33 GTexel / s versus 30.53 GTexel / s
- Environ 16% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 847.9 gflops versus 732.7 gflops
- Environ 21% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1914 versus 1577
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 423 versus 410
- Environ 61% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 6235 versus 3883
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 18.456 versus 14.283
- Environ 60% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 618.773 versus 386.006
- Environ 66% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.693 versus 1.018
- Environ 75% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 27.232 versus 15.605
- Environ 61% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 50.114 versus 31.155
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2970 versus 2646
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3356 versus 3339
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2970 versus 2646
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3356 versus 3339
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 35.33 GTexel / s versus 30.53 GTexel / s |
| Performance á point flottant | 847.9 gflops versus 732.7 gflops |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1914 versus 1577 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 423 versus 410 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 6235 versus 3883 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 18.456 versus 14.283 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 618.773 versus 386.006 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.693 versus 1.018 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 27.232 versus 15.605 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 50.114 versus 31.155 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2970 versus 2646 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 versus 3339 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2970 versus 2646 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 versus 3339 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K2000D
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE
| 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 K2000D | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1577 | 1914 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 410 | 423 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3883 | 6235 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 14.283 | 18.456 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 386.006 | 618.773 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.018 | 1.693 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 15.605 | 27.232 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 31.155 | 50.114 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2646 | 2970 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3493 | 3114 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3339 | 3356 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2646 | 2970 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3493 | 3114 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3339 | 3356 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Quadro K2000D | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Kepler | Fermi 2.0 |
| Nom de code | GK107 | GF114 |
| Date de sortie | 1 March 2013 | 20 February 2012 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $599 | $89.99 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | not rated | not rated |
| Prix maintenant | $464 | $89.99 |
| Genre | Workstation | Desktop |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 4.14 | 28.95 |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse du noyau | 954 MHz | 736 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 732.7 gflops | 847.9 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | 288 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 30.53 GTexel / s | 35.33 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 51 Watt | 150 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,270 million | 1,950 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 2x DVI, 1x mini-DisplayPort | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 202 mm | 210 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 2x 6-pin |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 1 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 64 GB / s | 91.87 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 192 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4000 MHz | 3828 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA Quadro K2000D avec des autres
NVIDIAQuadro K2000D vs
AMDRadeon HD 8750M
NVIDIAQuadro K2000D vs
NVIDIAQuadro K600
NVIDIAQuadro K2000D vs
NVIDIAQuadro K4000
