NVIDIA Quadro P2200 versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro P2200 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 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 P2200
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 mois plus tard
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 9372 versus 7881
- Environ 58% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 892 versus 564
- Environ 49% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1958.592 versus 1316.075
- Environ 27% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 120.742 versus 94.915
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 11437 versus 10959
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 11437 versus 10959
- 11.2x meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3404 versus 305
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 10 June 2019 versus 30 April 2019 |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 9372 versus 7881 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 892 versus 564 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1958.592 versus 1316.075 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 120.742 versus 94.915 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 11437 versus 10959 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3717 versus 3715 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 11437 versus 10959 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3717 versus 3715 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3404 versus 305 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
- Environ 49% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1485 MHz versus 1000 MHz
- Environ 12% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1665 MHz versus 1493 MHz
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 12 nm versus 16 nm
- Environ 21% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 39165 versus 32343
- Environ 11% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 134.765 versus 121.124
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 8.799 versus 8.452
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 573.418 versus 510.941
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 versus 1676
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 versus 1676
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 1485 MHz versus 1000 MHz |
Vitesse augmenté | 1665 MHz versus 1493 MHz |
Processus de fabrication | 12 nm versus 16 nm |
Référence | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 39165 versus 32343 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 134.765 versus 121.124 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 8.799 versus 8.452 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 573.418 versus 510.941 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 1676 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 1676 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P2200
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
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 |
|
|
Nom | NVIDIA Quadro P2200 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 9372 | 7881 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 892 | 564 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 32343 | 39165 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 121.124 | 134.765 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1958.592 | 1316.075 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 8.452 | 8.799 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 120.742 | 94.915 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 510.941 | 573.418 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 11437 | 10959 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3717 | 3715 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1676 | 3358 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 11437 | 10959 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3717 | 3715 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1676 | 3358 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3404 | 305 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA Quadro P2200 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Pascal | Turing |
Nom de code | GP106 | TU107 |
Date de sortie | 10 June 2019 | 30 April 2019 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 307 | 376 |
Genre | Workstation | Desktop |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $179 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1493 MHz | 1665 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 1000 MHz | 1485 MHz |
Processus de fabrication | 16 nm | 12 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 119.4 GFLOPS | |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 59.72 GFLOPS | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 3.822 TFLOPS | |
Pipelines | 1280 | |
Pixel fill rate | 59.72 GPixel/s | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 119.4 GTexel/s | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | |
Compte de transistor | 4400 million | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | 4x DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
Compte DisplayPort | 1 | |
Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
HDMI | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Longeur | 201 mm (7.9") | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 | 12.0 |
OpenCL | 1.2 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Shader Model | 6.4 | |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 5 GB | |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 200.2 GB/s | |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 160 bit | |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5X | |
Vitesse de mémoire | 8000 MHz |