NVIDIA Quadro M4000 versus NVIDIA Quadro K6000
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro M4000 and NVIDIA Quadro K6000 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 M4000
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 11 mois plus tard
- Environ 88% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 120 Watt versus 225 Watt
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 673 versus 551
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 29 June 2015 versus 23 July 2013 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 120 Watt versus 225 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 673 versus 551 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro K6000
- Environ 3% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 797 MHz versus 773 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 216.5 GTexel / s versus 80.39 GTexel / s
- Environ 73% de pipelines plus haut: 2880 versus 1664
- 2x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 5,196 gflops versus 2,573 gflops
- Environ 50% plus de taille maximale de mémoire: 12 GB versus 8 GB
- Environ 21% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 8096 versus 6680
- Environ 31% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 24013 versus 18372
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 67.178 versus 65.548
- 2.5x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1816.61 versus 732.046
- Environ 36% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 7.435 versus 5.453
- 5x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 88.889 versus 17.725
- Environ 63% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 355.166 versus 217.357
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 12657 versus 6291
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3711 versus 3685
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3356 versus 3332
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 12657 versus 6291
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3711 versus 3685
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3356 versus 3332
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 797 MHz versus 773 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 216.5 GTexel / s versus 80.39 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 2880 versus 1664 |
| Performance á point flottant | 5,196 gflops versus 2,573 gflops |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 12 GB versus 8 GB |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 8096 versus 6680 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 24013 versus 18372 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 67.178 versus 65.548 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1816.61 versus 732.046 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 7.435 versus 5.453 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 88.889 versus 17.725 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 355.166 versus 217.357 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12657 versus 6291 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3711 versus 3685 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 versus 3332 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12657 versus 6291 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3711 versus 3685 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 versus 3332 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M4000
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K6000
| 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 M4000 | NVIDIA Quadro K6000 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6680 | 8096 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 673 | 551 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 18372 | 24013 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 65.548 | 67.178 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 732.046 | 1816.61 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.453 | 7.435 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 17.725 | 88.889 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 217.357 | 355.166 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6291 | 12657 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3685 | 3711 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3332 | 3356 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6291 | 12657 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3685 | 3711 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3332 | 3356 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 680 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Quadro M4000 | NVIDIA Quadro K6000 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Kepler |
| Nom de code | GM204 | GK110B |
| Date de sortie | 29 June 2015 | 23 July 2013 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $791 | $5,265 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 534 | 364 |
| Prix maintenant | $765.93 | $833.98 |
| Genre | Workstation | Workstation |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 10.68 | 11.34 |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse du noyau | 773 MHz | 797 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,573 gflops | 5,196 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 1664 | 2880 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 80.39 GTexel / s | 216.5 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 120 Watt | 225 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 5,200 million | 7,080 million |
| Vitesse augmenté | 902 MHz | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 4x DisplayPort, DP DP DP DP 3-pin Stereo | 2x DVI, 2x DisplayPort |
| Synchronization de plusieurs écrans | Quadro Sync | |
| Nombre d’écrans á la fois | 4 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 241 mm | 267 mm |
| Options SLI | 1 | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1 x 6-pin | 2x 6-pin |
| Largeur | 1" (2.5 cm) | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (11_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 5 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 8 GB | 12 GB |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 256 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 6008 MHz | 6008 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 288.4 GB / s | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| High-Performance Video I/O6 | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView Desktop Management | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA Quadro M4000 avec des autres
NVIDIAQuadro M4000 vs
ATIRadeon X850 XT
NVIDIAQuadro M4000 vs
ATIFireGL V7300
NVIDIAQuadro M4000 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 9500M GE
NVIDIAQuadro M4000 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 740A
NVIDIAQuadro M4000 vs
NVIDIAQuadro K5200
NVIDIAQuadro M4000 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook)
