NVIDIA Quadro P1000 versus AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro P1000 and AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire. 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 P1000
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 mois plus tard
- Environ 78% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1266 MHz versus 713 MHz
- Environ 36% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1480 MHz versus 1086 MHz
- Environ 60% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 47 Watt versus 75 Watt
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6796 versus 5579
- 2.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3702 versus 1691
- 2.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3348 versus 1565
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6796 versus 5579
- 2.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3702 versus 1691
- 2.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3348 versus 1565
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 7 February 2017 versus 18 November 2016 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1266 MHz versus 713 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1480 MHz versus 1086 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 47 Watt versus 75 Watt |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz versus 5000 MHz |
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6796 versus 5579 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3702 versus 1691 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3348 versus 1565 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6796 versus 5579 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3702 versus 1691 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3348 versus 1565 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 121.6 GTexel / s versus 59.2 GTexel / s
- 3.5x plus de pipelines: 1792 versus 512
- 2.1x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 3,892 gflops versus 1,894 gflops
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 8 GB versus 4 GB
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 5489 versus 4500
- Environ 31% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 772 versus 590
- Environ 63% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 25596 versus 15667
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 87.861 versus 71.86
- Environ 64% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1362.14 versus 832.248
- Environ 49% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 6.025 versus 4.039
- Environ 63% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 106.141 versus 65.117
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 250.267 versus 245.081
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 121.6 GTexel / s versus 59.2 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1792 versus 512 |
| Performance á point flottant | 3,892 gflops versus 1,894 gflops |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 8 GB versus 4 GB |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 5489 versus 4500 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 772 versus 590 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 25596 versus 15667 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 87.861 versus 71.86 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1362.14 versus 832.248 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.025 versus 4.039 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 106.141 versus 65.117 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 250.267 versus 245.081 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P1000
GPU 2: AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100
| 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 P1000 | AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4500 | 5489 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 590 | 772 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 15667 | 25596 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 71.86 | 87.861 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 832.248 | 1362.14 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.039 | 6.025 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 65.117 | 106.141 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 245.081 | 250.267 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6796 | 5579 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3702 | 1691 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3348 | 1565 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6796 | 5579 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3702 | 1691 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3348 | 1565 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1591 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Quadro P1000 | AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | GCN 4.0 |
| Nom de code | GP107 | Ellesmere |
| Date de sortie | 7 February 2017 | 18 November 2016 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $375 | $499 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 517 | 477 |
| Prix maintenant | $319.99 | $349.99 |
| Genre | Workstation | Workstation |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 15.53 | 19.34 |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1480 MHz | 1086 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1266 MHz | 713 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,894 gflops | 3,892 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Pipelines | 512 | 1792 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 59.2 GTexel / s | 121.6 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 47 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 3,300 million | 5,700 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 4x mini-DisplayPort | 4x DisplayPort |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 145 mm | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (12_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 8 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 80.19 GB / s | 160.0 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz | 5000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA Quadro P1000 avec des autres
NVIDIAQuadro P1000 vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 370M
NVIDIAQuadro P1000 vs
AMDRadeon HD 7850
NVIDIAQuadro P1000 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 770
NVIDIAQuadro P1000 vs
NVIDIATesla K40c
NVIDIAQuadro P1000 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 850A
NVIDIAQuadro P1000 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960
