NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile versus AMD Radeon R7 450 OEM
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile and AMD Radeon R7 450 OEM 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).
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 6 mois plus tard
- Environ 18% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1093 MHz versus 925 MHz
- Environ 48% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 43.72 GTexel / s versus 29.6 GTexel / s
- Environ 25% de pipelines plus haut: 640 versus 512
- Environ 48% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,399 gflops versus 947.2 gflops
- Environ 44% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 45 Watt versus 65 Watt
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 4 GB versus 2 GB
- Environ 11% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 5012 MHz versus 4500 MHz
- Environ 67% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3242 versus 1938
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 10582 versus 9616
- 2.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 52.821 versus 24.788
- Environ 24% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 793.297 versus 638.196
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.631 versus 2.619
- Environ 18% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 48.966 versus 41.414
- Environ 45% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 163.204 versus 112.347
- Environ 76% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4941 versus 2809
- Environ 76% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4941 versus 2809
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 11 January 2017 versus 30 June 2016 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1093 MHz versus 925 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 43.72 GTexel / s versus 29.6 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 640 versus 512 |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,399 gflops versus 947.2 gflops |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt versus 65 Watt |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 4 GB versus 2 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz versus 4500 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3242 versus 1938 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 10582 versus 9616 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 52.821 versus 24.788 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 793.297 versus 638.196 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.631 versus 2.619 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 48.966 versus 41.414 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 163.204 versus 112.347 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4941 versus 2809 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3359 versus 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4941 versus 2809 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3359 versus 3358 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R7 450 OEM
- Environ 68% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 535 versus 319
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3666 versus 2645
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3666 versus 2645
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 535 versus 319 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3666 versus 2645 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3666 versus 2645 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 450 OEM
| 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 M1200 Mobile | AMD Radeon R7 450 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3242 | 1938 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 319 | 535 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 10582 | 9616 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 52.821 | 24.788 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 793.297 | 638.196 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.631 | 2.619 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 48.966 | 41.414 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 163.204 | 112.347 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4941 | 2809 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2645 | 3666 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3359 | 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4941 | 2809 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2645 | 3666 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3359 | 3358 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile | AMD Radeon R7 450 OEM | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | GCN 1.0 |
| Nom de code | GM107 | Cape Verde |
| Date de sortie | 11 January 2017 | 30 June 2016 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 768 | 769 |
| Genre | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse du noyau | 1093 MHz | 925 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,399 gflops | 947.2 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 640 | 512 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 43.72 GTexel / s | 29.6 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt | 65 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,870 million | 1,500 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 6-pin | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 2 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 80.19 GB / s | 72 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz | 4500 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile avec des autres
NVIDIAQuadro M1200 Mobile vs
ATIRadeon X600 SE
NVIDIAQuadro M1200 Mobile vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960M
NVIDIAQuadro M1200 Mobile vs
AMDRadeon R9 M470
NVIDIAQuadro M1200 Mobile vs
AMDRadeon R7 450 OEM
NVIDIAQuadro M1200 Mobile vs
NVIDIAQuadro P520
NVIDIAQuadro M1200 Mobile vs
NVIDIAGeForce MX330
