NVIDIA Quadro K620M versus AMD Radeon R7 M265
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro K620M and AMD Radeon R7 M265 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, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (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), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s).
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro K620M
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 9 mois plus tard
- Environ 14% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1029 MHz versus 900 MHz
- Environ 36% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1124 MHz versus 825 MHz
- Environ 36% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 863.2 gflops versus 633.6 gflops
- Environ 80% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 1800 MHz versus 1000 MHz
- 2.2x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1163 versus 540
- Environ 15% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 157 versus 136
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 5974 versus 5587
- Environ 98% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 23.872 versus 12.031
- Environ 34% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 91.813 versus 68.392
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 1 March 2015 versus 20 May 2014 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1029 MHz versus 900 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1124 MHz versus 825 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 863.2 gflops versus 633.6 gflops |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1800 MHz versus 1000 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1163 versus 540 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 157 versus 136 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5974 versus 5587 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 23.872 versus 12.031 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 91.813 versus 68.392 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R7 M265
- Environ 10% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 19.8 GTexel / s versus 17.98 GTexel / s
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 4 GB versus 2 GB
- Environ 70% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 282.111 versus 165.904
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1551 versus 1291
- Environ 36% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1264 versus 927
- Environ 80% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2424 versus 1349
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1551 versus 1291
- Environ 36% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1264 versus 927
- Environ 80% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2424 versus 1349
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 19.8 GTexel / s versus 17.98 GTexel / s |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 4 GB versus 2 GB |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 282.111 versus 165.904 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1551 versus 1291 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1264 versus 927 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2424 versus 1349 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1551 versus 1291 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1264 versus 927 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2424 versus 1349 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro K620M
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 M265
| 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 - 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 K620M | AMD Radeon R7 M265 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1163 | 540 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 157 | 136 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5974 | 5587 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 23.872 | 12.031 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 165.904 | 282.111 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 91.813 | 68.392 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1291 | 1551 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 927 | 1264 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1349 | 2424 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1291 | 1551 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 927 | 1264 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1349 | 2424 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.455 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 21.704 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Quadro K620M | AMD Radeon R7 M265 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | GCN 3.0 |
| Nom de code | GM108 | Topaz |
| Date de sortie | 1 March 2015 | 20 May 2014 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 1414 | 1416 |
| Genre | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
| Conception | AMD Radeon R7 200 Series | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1124 MHz | 825 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1029 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 863.2 gflops | 633.6 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | 384 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 17.98 GTexel / s | 19.8 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt | |
| Unités de Compute | 6 | |
| Compte de transistor | 3,100 million | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
| Display Port | 1.2 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 x8 | |
| Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 11 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
| Shader Model | 5 | |
| Mantle | ||
| OpenCL | Not Listed | |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 14.4 GB / s | 32 GB/s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 Bit | 128 bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1800 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision | ||
| 3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
| CUDA | ||
| nView Display Management | ||
| Optimus | ||
| DualGraphics | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| HD3D | ||
| PCIe 3.0 | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| Graphiques changeables | ||
| Zero Core | ||
| ZeroCore | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA Quadro K620M avec des autres
NVIDIAQuadro K620M vs
ATIRadeon 7200
NVIDIAQuadro K620M vs
NVIDIAGeForce 9600 GSO
NVIDIAQuadro K620M vs
IntelHD Graphics 4400
NVIDIAQuadro K620M vs
AMDRadeon R7 M265
NVIDIAQuadro K620M vs
AMDRadeon R6 Graphics
NVIDIAQuadro K620M vs
IntelUHD Graphics 615
