NVIDIA Quadro M3000M versus AMD Radeon R9 280

Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro M3000M and AMD Radeon R9 280 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 280

Différences

Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro M3000M

La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 5 mois plus tard
2.7x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 75 Watt versus 200 Watt
Environ 33% plus de taille maximale de mémoire: 4 GB versus 3 GB
4x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 5012 MHz versus 1250 MHz
Environ 22% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 82.563 versus 67.829
Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3720 versus 3698
Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3360 versus 3337
Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3720 versus 3698
Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3360 versus 3337

Caractéristiques
Date de sortie	18 August 2015 versus 4 March 2014
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	75 Watt versus 200 Watt
Taille de mémore maximale	4 GB versus 3 GB
Vitesse de mémoire	5012 MHz versus 1250 MHz
Référence
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	82.563 versus 67.829
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	3720 versus 3698
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	3360 versus 3337
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	3720 versus 3698
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	3360 versus 3337

Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 280

Environ 56% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 104.5 GTexel / s versus 67.2 GTexel / s
Environ 75% de pipelines plus haut: 1792 versus 1,024
Environ 56% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 3,344 gflops versus 2,150 gflops
Environ 1% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 5562 versus 5526
Environ 65% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 665 versus 402
Environ 32% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 6.495 versus 4.91
Environ 13% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 79.909 versus 70.779
Environ 45% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 365.384 versus 252.607
Environ 2% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 7957 versus 7779
Environ 2% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 7957 versus 7779

Caractéristiques
Taux de remplissage de la texture	104.5 GTexel / s versus 67.2 GTexel / s
Pipelines	1792 versus 1,024
Performance á point flottant	3,344 gflops versus 2,150 gflops
Référence
PassMark - G3D Mark	5562 versus 5526
PassMark - G2D Mark	665 versus 402
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	1266.685 versus 1266.506
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	6.495 versus 4.91
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	79.909 versus 70.779
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	365.384 versus 252.607
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	7957 versus 7779
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	7957 versus 7779

Comparer les références

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M3000M
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 280

PassMark - G3D Mark

GPU 1

GPU 2

5526

5562

PassMark - G2D Mark

GPU 1

GPU 2

402

665

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

82.563

67.829

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

GPU 1

GPU 2

1266.506

1266.685

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

GPU 1

GPU 2

4.91

6.495

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

70.779

79.909

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

252.607

365.384

GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)

GPU 1

GPU 2

7779

7957

GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)

GPU 1

GPU 2

3720

3698

GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)

GPU 1

GPU 2

3360

3337

GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)

GPU 1

GPU 2

7779

7957

GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)

GPU 1

GPU 2

3720

3698

GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)

GPU 1

GPU 2

3360

3337

Nom	NVIDIA Quadro M3000M	AMD Radeon R9 280
PassMark - G3D Mark	5526	5562
PassMark - G2D Mark	402	665
Geekbench - OpenCL	16049
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	82.563	67.829
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	1266.506	1266.685
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	4.91	6.495
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	70.779	79.909
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	252.607	365.384
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	7779	7957
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	3720	3698
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	3360	3337
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	7779	7957
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	3720	3698
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	3360	3337
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score		2009

Comparer les caractéristiques

	NVIDIA Quadro M3000M	AMD Radeon R9 280
Essentiel
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0	GCN 1.0
Nom de code	GM204	Tahiti
Date de sortie	18 August 2015	4 March 2014
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance	495	423
Genre	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Conception		AMD Radeon R9 200 Series
Prix de sortie (MSRP)		$279
Infos techniques
Vitesse du noyau	1050 MHz
Performance á point flottant	2,150 gflops	3,344 gflops
Processus de fabrication	28 nm	28 nm
Pipelines	1,024	1792
Taux de remplissage de la texture	67.2 GTexel / s	104.5 GTexel / s
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	75 Watt	200 Watt
Compte de transistor	5,200 million	4,313 million
Vitesse augmenté		933 MHz
Stream Processors		1792
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
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 + 1 x 8-pin
Soutien de bus		PCIe 3.0
Longeur		275 mm
Soutien API
DirectX	12	12
OpenGL	4.5	4.5
Shader Model	5.0
Vulkan
Mémoire
RAM maximale	4 GB	3 GB
Bande passante de la mémoire	160 GB / s	240 GB/s
Largeur du bus mémoire	256 Bit	384 Bit
Vitesse de mémoire	5012 MHz	1250 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)