NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M 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 M1200 Mobile
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 9 mois plus tard
- Environ 67% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 45 Watt versus 75 Watt
- 2x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 5012 MHz versus 2500 MHz
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 319 versus 247
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 11 January 2017 versus 13 March 2015 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt versus 75 Watt |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz versus 2500 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 319 versus 247 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3359 versus 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3359 versus 3358 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
- Environ 8% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 47.04 GTexel / s versus 43.72 GTexel / s
- Environ 8% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,505 gflops versus 1,399 gflops
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3398 versus 3242
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 10734 versus 10582
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 54.294 versus 52.821
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.692 versus 3.631
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 51.794 versus 48.966
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 174.513 versus 163.204
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5264 versus 4941
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3714 versus 2645
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5264 versus 4941
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3714 versus 2645
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1096 MHz versus 1093 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 47.04 GTexel / s versus 43.72 GTexel / s |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,505 gflops versus 1,399 gflops |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3398 versus 3242 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 10734 versus 10582 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 54.294 versus 52.821 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 795.325 versus 793.297 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.692 versus 3.631 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 51.794 versus 48.966 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 174.513 versus 163.204 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5264 versus 4941 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 versus 2645 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5264 versus 4941 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 versus 2645 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
| 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 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3242 | 3398 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 319 | 247 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 10582 | 10734 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 52.821 | 54.294 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 793.297 | 795.325 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.631 | 3.692 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 48.966 | 51.794 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 163.204 | 174.513 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4941 | 5264 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2645 | 3714 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3359 | 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4941 | 5264 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2645 | 3714 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3359 | 3358 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1230 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | Maxwell |
| Nom de code | GM107 | GM107 |
| Date de sortie | 11 January 2017 | 13 March 2015 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 768 | 771 |
| Genre | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse du noyau | 1093 MHz | 1096 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,399 gflops | 1,505 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 640 | 640 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 43.72 GTexel / s | 47.04 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,870 million | 1,870 million |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1176 MHz | |
| Noyaux CUDA | 640 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
| Soutien de DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) | 1 | |
| HDMI | ||
| Soutien de l’écran analog VGA | 1 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Taille du laptop | medium sized | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 80.19 GB / s | 80 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz | 2500 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| Adaptive VSync | ||
| Ansel | ||
| BatteryBoost | ||
| CUDA | ||
| DSR | ||
| GameStream | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
| Optimus | ||
| SLI | ||
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
