NVIDIA Quadro K2200 versus NVIDIA Quadro K5000M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro K2200 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. 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 1 ans 11 mois plus tard
- Environ 74% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1046 MHz versus 601 MHz
- Environ 47% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 68 Watt versus 100 Watt
- Environ 67% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 5012 MHz versus 3000 MHz
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3551 versus 2752
- Environ 56% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 545 versus 350
- 2.4x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 12020 versus 5107
- Environ 65% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 40.695 versus 24.713
- Environ 46% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.205 versus 2.189
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 30.455 versus 28.929
- 2.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 165.39 versus 68.712
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4921 versus 4825
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4921 versus 4825
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 22 July 2014 versus 7 August 2012 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1046 MHz versus 601 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 68 Watt versus 100 Watt |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz versus 3000 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3551 versus 2752 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 545 versus 350 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 12020 versus 5107 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 40.695 versus 24.713 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.205 versus 2.189 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 30.455 versus 28.929 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 165.39 versus 68.712 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4921 versus 4825 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4921 versus 4825 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro K5000M
- Environ 50% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 67.31 GTexel / s versus 44.96 GTexel / s
- 2.1x plus de pipelines: 1344 versus 640
- Environ 12% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,615 gflops versus 1,439 gflops
- Environ 16% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 685.1 versus 588.094
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3712 versus 1577
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3353 versus 1671
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3712 versus 1577
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3353 versus 1671
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 67.31 GTexel / s versus 44.96 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1344 versus 640 |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,615 gflops versus 1,439 gflops |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 685.1 versus 588.094 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3712 versus 1577 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 versus 1671 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3712 versus 1577 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 versus 1671 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K2200
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 K2200 | NVIDIA Quadro K5000M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3551 | 2752 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 545 | 350 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 12020 | 5107 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 40.695 | 24.713 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 588.094 | 685.1 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.205 | 2.189 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 30.455 | 28.929 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 165.39 | 68.712 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4921 | 4825 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1577 | 3712 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1671 | 3353 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4921 | 4825 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1577 | 3712 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1671 | 3353 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1193 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Quadro K2200 | NVIDIA Quadro K5000M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | Kepler |
| Nom de code | GM107 | GK104 |
| Date de sortie | 22 July 2014 | 7 August 2012 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $395.75 | $329.99 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 804 | 801 |
| Prix maintenant | $343.99 | $391 |
| Genre | Workstation | Mobile workstation |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 13.01 | 8.47 |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1124 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1046 MHz | 601 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,439 gflops | 1,615 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 640 | 1344 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 44.96 GTexel / s | 67.31 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 68 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,870 million | 3,540 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Longeur | 202 mm | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
| Taille du laptop | large | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| 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 | 256 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz | 3000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA Quadro K2200 avec des autres
NVIDIAQuadro K2200 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 470
NVIDIAQuadro K2200 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 570 Rev. 2
NVIDIAQuadro K2200 vs
AMDRadeon HD 6450A
NVIDIAQuadro K2200 vs
AMDRadeon HD 7450M
NVIDIAQuadro K2200 vs
NVIDIAQuadro K5000M
NVIDIAQuadro K2200 vs
NVIDIATesla K80m
