NVIDIA Quadro M3000M versus AMD Radeon R9 270

Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro M3000M and AMD Radeon R9 270 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.

NVIDIA Quadro M3000M

versus

AMD Radeon R9 270

Différences

Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro M3000M

La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 9 mois plus tard
2x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 75 Watt versus 150 Watt
2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 4 GB versus 2 GB
Environ 29% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 5568 versus 4306
Environ 48% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 82.563 versus 55.721
2.3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 7779 versus 3448
Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3720 versus 3699
2.3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 7779 versus 3448
Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3720 versus 3699

Caractéristiques
Date de sortie	18 August 2015 versus 13 November 2013
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	75 Watt versus 150 Watt
Taille de mémore maximale	4 GB versus 2 GB
Référence
PassMark - G3D Mark	5568 versus 4306
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	82.563 versus 55.721
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	7779 versus 3448
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	3720 versus 3699
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	3360 versus 3347
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	7779 versus 3448
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	3720 versus 3699
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	3360 versus 3347

Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 270

Environ 10% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 74 GTexel / s versus 67.2 GTexel / s
Environ 25% de pipelines plus haut: 1280 versus 1,024
Environ 10% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2,368 gflops versus 2,150 gflops
Environ 39% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 567 versus 409
4.5x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 74175 versus 16648
Environ 1% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1282.039 versus 1266.506
Environ 21% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.927 versus 4.91
Environ 32% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 93.116 versus 70.779
Environ 4% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 261.843 versus 252.607

Caractéristiques
Taux de remplissage de la texture	74 GTexel / s versus 67.2 GTexel / s
Pipelines	1280 versus 1,024
Performance á point flottant	2,368 gflops versus 2,150 gflops
Référence
PassMark - G2D Mark	567 versus 409
Geekbench - OpenCL	74175 versus 16648
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	1282.039 versus 1266.506
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	5.927 versus 4.91
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	93.116 versus 70.779
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	261.843 versus 252.607

Comparer les références

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M3000M
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 270

PassMark - G3D Mark

GPU 1

GPU 2

5568

4306

PassMark - G2D Mark

GPU 1

GPU 2

409

567

Geekbench - OpenCL

GPU 1

GPU 2

16648

74175

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

82.563

55.721

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

1266.506

1282.039

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

4.91

5.927

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

70.779

93.116

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

252.607

261.843

GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)

GPU 1

GPU 2

7779

3448

GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)

GPU 1

GPU 2

3720

3699

GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)

GPU 1

GPU 2

3360

3347

GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)

GPU 1

GPU 2

7779

3448

GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)

GPU 1

GPU 2

3720

3699

GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)

GPU 1

GPU 2

3360

3347

Nom	NVIDIA Quadro M3000M	AMD Radeon R9 270
PassMark - G3D Mark	5568	4306
PassMark - G2D Mark	409	567
Geekbench - OpenCL	16648	74175
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	82.563	55.721
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	1266.506	1282.039
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	4.91	5.927
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	70.779	93.116
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	252.607	261.843
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	7779	3448
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	3720	3699
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	3360	3347
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	7779	3448
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	3720	3699
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	3360	3347
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score		1603

Comparer les caractéristiques

	NVIDIA Quadro M3000M	AMD Radeon R9 270
Essentiel
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0	GCN 1.0
Nom de code	GM204	Curacao
Date de sortie	18 August 2015	13 November 2013
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance	498	501
Genre	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Conception		AMD Radeon R9 200 Series
Prix de sortie (MSRP)		$179
Infos techniques
Vitesse du noyau	1050 MHz
Performance á point flottant	2,150 gflops	2,368 gflops
Processus de fabrication	28 nm	28 nm
Pipelines	1,024	1280
Taux de remplissage de la texture	67.2 GTexel / s	74 GTexel / s
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	75 Watt	150 Watt
Compte de transistor	5,200 million	2,800 million
Vitesse augmenté		925 MHz
Stream Processors		1280
Sorties et ports de vidéo
Connecteurs d’écran	No outputs	2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Display Port	1.2
Soutien de DisplayPort
Soutien de Dual-link DVI
Eyefinity
HDMI
VGA
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Taille du laptop	large
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires	None	1 x 6-pin
Soutien de bus		PCIe 3.0
Longeur		210 mm
Soutien API
DirectX	12	12
OpenGL	4.5	4.5
Shader Model	5.0
Vulkan
Mémoire
RAM maximale	4 GB	2 GB
Bande passante de la mémoire	160 GB / s	179.2 GB/s
Largeur du bus mémoire	256 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
DDMA audio
FreeSync
HD3D
LiquidVR
TressFX
TrueAudio
Unified Video Decoder (UVD)