NVIDIA Quadro M1000M versus AMD Radeon HD 6850
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro M1000M and AMD Radeon HD 6850 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 - 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 M1000M
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 4 ans 9 mois plus tard
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 28 nm versus 40 nm
- 3.2x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 40 Watt versus 127 Watt
- Environ 46% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 2874 versus 1972
- 2.9x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 38.33 versus 13.033
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.056 versus 1.333
- Environ 32% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 42.938 versus 32.609
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4196 versus 3489
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4196 versus 3489
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 18 August 2015 versus 21 October 2010 |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm versus 40 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 40 Watt versus 127 Watt |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2874 versus 1972 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 38.33 versus 13.033 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.056 versus 1.333 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 42.938 versus 32.609 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4196 versus 3489 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3716 versus 3708 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 3348 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4196 versus 3489 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3716 versus 3708 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 3348 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon HD 6850
- Environ 17% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 37.2 GTexel / s versus 31.78 GTexel / s
- Environ 88% de pipelines plus haut: 960 versus 512
- Environ 46% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,488.0 gflops versus 1,017 gflops
- 512x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 1 GB versus 2 GB / 4 GB
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 434 versus 313
- Environ 31% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 946.933 versus 721.18
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 139.45 versus 137.786
Caractéristiques | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 37.2 GTexel / s versus 31.78 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 960 versus 512 |
Performance á point flottant | 1,488.0 gflops versus 1,017 gflops |
Taille de mémore maximale | 1 GB versus 2 GB / 4 GB |
Référence | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 434 versus 313 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 946.933 versus 721.18 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 139.45 versus 137.786 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M1000M
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 6850
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
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 M1000M | AMD Radeon HD 6850 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2874 | 1972 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 313 | 434 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 8849 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 38.33 | 13.033 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 721.18 | 946.933 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.056 | 1.333 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 42.938 | 32.609 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 137.786 | 139.45 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4196 | 3489 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3716 | 3708 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3348 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4196 | 3489 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3716 | 3708 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3348 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1002 | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA Quadro M1000M | AMD Radeon HD 6850 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Maxwell | TeraScale 2 |
Nom de code | GM107 | Barts |
Date de sortie | 18 August 2015 | 21 October 2010 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $200.89 | $179 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 832 | 823 |
Prix maintenant | $203.37 | $99.99 |
Genre | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 16.10 | 28.63 |
Conception | AMD Radeon HD 6000 Series | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1072 MHz | |
Vitesse du noyau | 993 MHz | |
Performance á point flottant | 1,017 gflops | 1,488.0 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 512 | 960 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 31.78 GTexel / s | 37.2 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 40 Watt | 127 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 1,870 million | 1,700 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort |
Display Port | 1.2 | |
Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
Eyefinity | ||
VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Taille du laptop | large | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 1x 6-pin |
Soutien de bus | AGP | |
Longeur | 198 mm | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12 | 11 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
Shader Model | 5.0 | |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 2 GB / 4 GB | 1 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 80 GB / s | 128.0 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz | |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision Pro | ||
Mosaic | ||
nView Display Management | ||
Optimus | ||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
CrossFire |