NVIDIA Quadro K2000D versus NVIDIA Tesla K20c
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro K2000D and NVIDIA Tesla K20c 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).
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro K2000D
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 3 mois plus tard
- Environ 35% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 954 MHz versus 706 MHz
- 4.4x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 51 Watt versus 225 Watt
| Date de sortie | 1 March 2013 versus 12 November 2012 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 954 MHz versus 706 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 51 Watt versus 225 Watt |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Tesla K20c
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 146.8 GTexel / s versus 30.53 GTexel / s
- 6.5x plus de pipelines: 2496 versus 384
- 4.8x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 3,524 gflops versus 732.7 gflops
- 2.5x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 5 GB versus 2 GB
- Environ 30% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 5200 MHz versus 4000 MHz
- 3.9x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 15597 versus 3973
- 2.8x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 39.423 versus 14.283
- 3.7x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1427.15 versus 386.006
- 4.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 4.128 versus 1.018
- 4.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 64.383 versus 15.605
- 5.7x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 179.044 versus 31.155
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 146.8 GTexel / s versus 30.53 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 2496 versus 384 |
| Performance á point flottant | 3,524 gflops versus 732.7 gflops |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 5 GB versus 2 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5200 MHz versus 4000 MHz |
| Référence | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 15597 versus 3973 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 39.423 versus 14.283 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1427.15 versus 386.006 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.128 versus 1.018 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 64.383 versus 15.605 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 179.044 versus 31.155 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K2000D
GPU 2: NVIDIA Tesla K20c
| 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) |
|
|
| Nom | NVIDIA Quadro K2000D | NVIDIA Tesla K20c |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1586 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 406 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3973 | 15597 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 14.283 | 39.423 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 386.006 | 1427.15 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.018 | 4.128 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 15.605 | 64.383 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 31.155 | 179.044 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2646 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3493 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3339 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2646 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3493 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3339 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Quadro K2000D | NVIDIA Tesla K20c | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Kepler | Kepler |
| Nom de code | GK107 | GK110 |
| Date de sortie | 1 March 2013 | 12 November 2012 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $599 | $3,199 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 979 | 980 |
| Prix maintenant | $464 | |
| Genre | Workstation | Workstation |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 4.14 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse du noyau | 954 MHz | 706 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 732.7 gflops | 3,524 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | 2496 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 30.53 GTexel / s | 146.8 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 51 Watt | 225 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,270 million | 7,080 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 2x DVI, 1x mini-DisplayPort | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 202 mm | 267 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 5 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 64 GB / s | 208.0 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 320 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4000 MHz | 5200 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA Quadro K2000D avec des autres
NVIDIAQuadro K2000D vs
ATIFireGL T2-128
NVIDIAQuadro K2000D vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 1100
NVIDIAQuadro K2000D vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 4225 IGP
NVIDIAQuadro K2000D vs
NVIDIAQuadro 5000
NVIDIAQuadro K2000D vs
NVIDIATesla K10
NVIDIAQuadro K2000D vs
NVIDIATesla K20c
