NVIDIA Quadro P1000 versus NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro P1000 and NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile 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
- Environ 16% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1266 MHz versus 1093 MHz
- Environ 35% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 59.2 GTexel / s versus 43.72 GTexel / s
- Environ 35% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,894 gflops versus 1,399 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 28 nm
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 4500 versus 3217
- Environ 89% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 590 versus 312
- Environ 48% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 15667 versus 10582
- Environ 36% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 71.86 versus 52.821
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 832.248 versus 793.297
- Environ 11% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 4.039 versus 3.631
- Environ 33% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 65.117 versus 48.966
- Environ 50% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 245.081 versus 163.204
- Environ 38% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6796 versus 4941
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3702 versus 2645
- Environ 38% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6796 versus 4941
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3702 versus 2645
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1266 MHz versus 1093 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 59.2 GTexel / s versus 43.72 GTexel / s |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,894 gflops versus 1,399 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 28 nm |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4500 versus 3217 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 590 versus 312 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 15667 versus 10582 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 71.86 versus 52.821 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 832.248 versus 793.297 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.039 versus 3.631 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 65.117 versus 48.966 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 245.081 versus 163.204 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6796 versus 4941 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3702 versus 2645 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6796 versus 4941 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3702 versus 2645 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile
- Environ 25% de pipelines plus haut: 640 versus 512
- Environ 4% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 45 Watt versus 47 Watt
| Caractéristiques | |
| Pipelines | 640 versus 512 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt versus 47 Watt |
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3359 versus 3348 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3359 versus 3348 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P1000
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile
| 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 | NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4500 | 3217 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 590 | 312 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 15667 | 10582 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 71.86 | 52.821 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 832.248 | 793.297 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.039 | 3.631 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 65.117 | 48.966 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 245.081 | 163.204 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6796 | 4941 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3702 | 2645 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3348 | 3359 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6796 | 4941 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3702 | 2645 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3348 | 3359 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1591 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Quadro P1000 | NVIDIA Quadro M1200 Mobile | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | Maxwell |
| Nom de code | GP107 | GM107 |
| Date de sortie | 7 February 2017 | 11 January 2017 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $375 | |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 517 | 759 |
| Prix maintenant | $319.99 | |
| Genre | Workstation | Mobile workstation |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 15.53 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1480 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1266 MHz | 1093 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,894 gflops | 1,399 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 512 | 640 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 59.2 GTexel / s | 43.72 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 47 Watt | 45 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 3,300 million | 1,870 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 4x mini-DisplayPort | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-A (3.0) |
| Longeur | 145 mm | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 80.19 GB / s | 80.19 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz | 5012 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
