NVIDIA Quadro K2200 versus AMD FirePro W5100
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro K2200 and AMD FirePro W5100 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 K2200
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 3 mois plus tard
- Environ 12% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1046 MHz versus 930 MHz
- Environ 1% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 44.96 GTexel / s versus 44.64 GTexel / s
- Environ 1% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,439 gflops versus 1,428 gflops
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3572 versus 2978
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 548 versus 531
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 12020 versus 11724
- Environ 16% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 40.695 versus 35.15
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 166.26 versus 163.258
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4921 versus 4397
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4921 versus 4397
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 22 July 2014 versus 31 March 2014 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1046 MHz versus 930 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 44.96 GTexel / s versus 44.64 GTexel / s |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,439 gflops versus 1,428 gflops |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3572 versus 2978 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 548 versus 531 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 12020 versus 11724 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 40.695 versus 35.15 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.205 versus 3.199 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 166.26 versus 163.258 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4921 versus 4397 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4921 versus 4397 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD FirePro W5100
- Environ 20% de pipelines plus haut: 768 versus 640
- Environ 36% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 50 Watt versus 68 Watt
- Environ 20% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 6000 MHz versus 5012 MHz
- Environ 43% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 838.518 versus 588.094
- Environ 88% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 57.354 versus 30.455
- 2.3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3688 versus 1577
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3356 versus 1671
- 2.3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3688 versus 1577
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3356 versus 1671
| Caractéristiques | |
| Pipelines | 768 versus 640 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt versus 68 Watt |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 6000 MHz versus 5012 MHz |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 838.518 versus 588.094 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 57.354 versus 30.455 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3688 versus 1577 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 versus 1671 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3688 versus 1577 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 versus 1671 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K2200
GPU 2: AMD FirePro W5100
| 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 K2200 | AMD FirePro W5100 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3572 | 2978 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 548 | 531 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 12020 | 11724 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 40.695 | 35.15 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 588.094 | 838.518 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.205 | 3.199 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 30.455 | 57.354 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 166.26 | 163.258 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4921 | 4397 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1577 | 3688 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1671 | 3356 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4921 | 4397 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1577 | 3688 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1671 | 3356 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1193 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Quadro K2200 | AMD FirePro W5100 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | GCN 2.0 |
| Nom de code | GM107 | Bonaire |
| Date de sortie | 22 July 2014 | 31 March 2014 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $395.75 | |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 787 | 627 |
| Prix maintenant | $343.99 | |
| Genre | Workstation | Workstation |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 13.01 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1124 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1046 MHz | 930 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,439 gflops | 1,428 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 640 | 768 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 44.96 GTexel / s | 44.64 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 68 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,870 million | 2,080 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort | 4x DisplayPort |
| Compte DisplayPort | 4 | |
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| Sortie du composant vidéo HD | ||
| StereoOutput3D | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 202 mm | 171 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | |
| Facteur de forme | Full Height / Half Length | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (12_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 80.19 GB / s | 96 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz | 6000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA Quadro K2200 avec des autres
NVIDIAQuadro K2200 vs
ATIMobility Radeon X600 SE
NVIDIAQuadro K2200 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 470
NVIDIAQuadro K2200 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 570 Rev. 2
NVIDIAQuadro K2200 vs
NVIDIAQuadro K5000M
NVIDIAQuadro K2200 vs
AMDRadeon Pro 450
NVIDIAQuadro K2200 vs
NVIDIAQuadro P500
