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 27% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3567 versus 2806
- Environ 52% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 547 versus 361
- 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): 166.26 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 | 3567 versus 2806 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 547 versus 361 |
| 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) | 166.26 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 | 3567 | 2806 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 547 | 361 |
| 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) | 166.26 | 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 | 805 | 807 |
| 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
AMDRadeon HD 6450A
NVIDIAQuadro K2200 vs
NVIDIAQuadro K5000M
NVIDIAQuadro K2200 vs
AMDFirePro M4100
NVIDIAQuadro K2200 vs
NVIDIAQuadro K1200
NVIDIAQuadro K2200 vs
NVIDIAQuadro P500
NVIDIAQuadro K2200 vs
AMDRadeon RX 640
