NVIDIA Quadro K2200M versus NVIDIA Quadro K2100M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro K2200M and NVIDIA Quadro K2100M pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire, Technologies. Analyse du performance de référence des cartes vidéo: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro K2200M
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 0 ans 11 mois plus tard
- Environ 11% de pipelines plus haut: 640 versus 576
- Environ 11% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 853.8 gflops versus 768.4 gflops
- Environ 67% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 5012 MHz versus 3008 MHz
- 2.6x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3501 versus 1363
- Environ 28% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 367 versus 287
- 2.4x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 10787 versus 4566
- 2.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4750 versus 2294
- 2.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4750 versus 2294
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3720 versus 3605
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3720 versus 3605
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 19 July 2014 versus 23 July 2013 |
Pipelines | 640 versus 576 |
Performance á point flottant | 853.8 gflops versus 768.4 gflops |
Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz versus 3008 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3501 versus 1363 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 367 versus 287 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 10787 versus 4566 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4750 versus 2294 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4750 versus 2294 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3720 versus 3605 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3720 versus 3605 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro K2100M
- Environ 20% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 32.02 GTexel / s versus 26.68 GTexel / s
- Environ 18% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 55 Watt versus 65 Watt
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3362 versus 3084
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3362 versus 3084
Caractéristiques | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 32.02 GTexel / s versus 26.68 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 55 Watt versus 65 Watt |
Référence | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3362 versus 3084 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3362 versus 3084 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K2200M
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K2100M
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Nom | NVIDIA Quadro K2200M | NVIDIA Quadro K2100M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3501 | 1363 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 367 | 287 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 10787 | 4566 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4750 | 2294 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4750 | 2294 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3720 | 3605 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3720 | 3605 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3084 | 3362 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3084 | 3362 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 12.383 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 358.892 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.107 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 21.761 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 40.703 | |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA Quadro K2200M | NVIDIA Quadro K2100M | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Maxwell | Kepler |
Nom de code | GM107 | GK106 |
Date de sortie | 19 July 2014 | 23 July 2013 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 549 | 1101 |
Genre | Workstation | Mobile workstation |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $84.95 | |
Prix maintenant | $159.99 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 10.91 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse du noyau | 667 MHz | 667 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 853.8 gflops | 768.4 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 640 | 576 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 26.68 GTexel / s | 32.02 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt | 55 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 1,870 million | 2,540 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Display Port | 1.2 | 1.2 |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | MXM-A (3.0) |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12 | 12 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Shader Model | 5 | 5 |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 2 GB | 2 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 80 GB / s | 48.0 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz | 3008 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision Pro | ||
Mosaic | ||
nView Display Management | ||
Optimus |