NVIDIA Quadro M4000M versus AMD Radeon HD 8970M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro M4000M and AMD Radeon HD 8970M 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 M4000M
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 3 mois plus tard
- Environ 15% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 975 MHz versus 850 MHz
- Environ 19% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1013 MHz versus 850 MHz
- Environ 8% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 78 GTexel / s versus 72 GTexel / s
- Environ 8% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2,496 gflops versus 2,304 gflops
- Environ 4% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 5012 MHz versus 4800 MHz
- Environ 58% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 6141 versus 3876
- Environ 42% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 81.104 versus 57.241
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1235.338 versus 1223.742
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 6.157 versus 5.78
- 3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 7602 versus 2521
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3093 versus 2595
- 3x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 7602 versus 2521
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3093 versus 2595
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 18 August 2015 versus 14 May 2013 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 975 MHz versus 850 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1013 MHz versus 850 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 78 GTexel / s versus 72 GTexel / s |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,496 gflops versus 2,304 gflops |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz versus 4800 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6141 versus 3876 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 81.104 versus 57.241 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1235.338 versus 1223.742 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.157 versus 5.78 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7602 versus 2521 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3093 versus 2595 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7602 versus 2521 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3093 versus 2595 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon HD 8970M
- Environ 98% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 807 versus 408
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 20899 versus 19918
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 89.306 versus 68.443
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 268.643 versus 251.464
- Environ 34% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3688 versus 2749
- Environ 34% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3688 versus 2749
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 807 versus 408 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 20899 versus 19918 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 89.306 versus 68.443 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 268.643 versus 251.464 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3688 versus 2749 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3688 versus 2749 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M4000M
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 8970M
| 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 M4000M | AMD Radeon HD 8970M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6141 | 3876 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 408 | 807 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 19918 | 20899 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 81.104 | 57.241 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1235.338 | 1223.742 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.157 | 5.78 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 68.443 | 89.306 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 251.464 | 268.643 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7602 | 2521 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2749 | 3688 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3093 | 2595 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7602 | 2521 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2749 | 3688 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3093 | 2595 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Quadro M4000M | AMD Radeon HD 8970M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Nom de code | GM204 | Neptune |
| Date de sortie | 18 August 2015 | 14 May 2013 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 562 | 554 |
| Genre | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
| Conception | AMD Radeon HD 8000M Series | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1013 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 975 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,496 gflops | 2,304 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 1,280 | 1280 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 78 GTexel / s | 72 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 5,200 million | 2,800 million |
| Unités de Compute | 20 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
| Display Port | 1.2 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Taille du laptop | large | large |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 11 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 160 GB / s | 153.6 GB/s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz | 4800 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView Display Management | ||
| Optimus | ||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| ZeroCore | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA Quadro M4000M avec des autres
NVIDIAQuadro M4000M vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 540
NVIDIAQuadro M4000M vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 4850
NVIDIAQuadro M4000M vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 670
NVIDIAQuadro M4000M vs
AMDRadeon R7 260
NVIDIAQuadro M4000M vs
NVIDIAQuadro P600
NVIDIAQuadro M4000M vs
NVIDIAP104-100
