NVIDIA Quadro P1000 versus NVIDIA Quadro M2000
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro P1000 and NVIDIA Quadro M2000 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 P1000
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 9 mois plus tard
- Environ 59% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1266 MHz versus 796 MHz
- Environ 27% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1480 MHz versus 1163 MHz
- Environ 5% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 59.2 GTexel / s versus 56.64 GTexel / s
- Environ 5% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,894 gflops versus 1,812 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 28 nm
- Environ 60% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 47 Watt versus 75 Watt
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 4500 versus 4000
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 590 versus 565
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 15667 versus 14591
- Environ 31% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 71.86 versus 55.048
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 832.248 versus 639.056
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 4.039 versus 3.697
- Environ 82% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 65.117 versus 35.796
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 245.081 versus 225.868
- Environ 23% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6796 versus 5523
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3348 versus 3325
- Environ 23% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6796 versus 5523
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3348 versus 3325
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 7 February 2017 versus 8 April 2016 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1266 MHz versus 796 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1480 MHz versus 1163 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 59.2 GTexel / s versus 56.64 GTexel / s |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,894 gflops versus 1,812 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 47 Watt versus 75 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4500 versus 4000 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 590 versus 565 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 15667 versus 14591 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 71.86 versus 55.048 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 832.248 versus 639.056 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.039 versus 3.697 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 65.117 versus 35.796 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 245.081 versus 225.868 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6796 versus 5523 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3702 versus 3684 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3348 versus 3325 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6796 versus 5523 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3702 versus 3684 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3348 versus 3325 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro M2000
- Environ 50% de pipelines plus haut: 768 versus 512
- Environ 32% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 6612 MHz versus 5012 MHz
| Pipelines | 768 versus 512 |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 6612 MHz versus 5012 MHz |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P1000
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro M2000
| 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 M2000 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4500 | 4000 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 590 | 565 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 15667 | 14591 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 71.86 | 55.048 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 832.248 | 639.056 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.039 | 3.697 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 65.117 | 35.796 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 245.081 | 225.868 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6796 | 5523 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3702 | 3684 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3348 | 3325 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6796 | 5523 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3702 | 3684 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3348 | 3325 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1591 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Quadro P1000 | NVIDIA Quadro M2000 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Nom de code | GP107 | GM206 |
| Date de sortie | 7 February 2017 | 8 April 2016 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $375 | $437.75 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 517 | 572 |
| Prix maintenant | $319.99 | $409.99 |
| Genre | Workstation | Workstation |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 15.53 | 13.23 |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1480 MHz | 1163 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1266 MHz | 796 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,894 gflops | 1,812 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 512 | 768 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 59.2 GTexel / s | 56.64 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 47 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 3,300 million | 2,940 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 4x mini-DisplayPort | 4x DisplayPort, DP DP DP DP |
| Nombre d’écrans á la fois | 4 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 145 mm | 201 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
| Largeur | 1" (2.5 cm) | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 5 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 80.19 GB / s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5012 MHz | 6612 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | 128 Bit |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView Desktop Management | ||
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
