NVIDIA Quadro P2200 versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro P2200 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti 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 3 mois plus tard
- Environ 60% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 75 Watt versus 120 Watt
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 905 versus 807
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 10 June 2019 versus 22 February 2019 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt versus 120 Watt |
Référence | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 905 versus 807 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
- Environ 50% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1500 MHz versus 1000 MHz
- Environ 19% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1770 MHz versus 1493 MHz
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 12 nm versus 16 nm
- Environ 38% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 12907 versus 9335
- Environ 87% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 60773 versus 32447
- Environ 72% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 208.608 versus 121.124
- Environ 31% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 2573.643 versus 1958.592
- Environ 95% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 16.447 versus 8.452
- Environ 21% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 145.886 versus 120.742
- Environ 81% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 926.614 versus 510.941
- Environ 48% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 16952 versus 11437
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3355 versus 1676
- Environ 48% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 16952 versus 11437
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3355 versus 1676
- Environ 84% meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 6273 versus 3404
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 1500 MHz versus 1000 MHz |
Vitesse augmenté | 1770 MHz versus 1493 MHz |
Processus de fabrication | 12 nm versus 16 nm |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 12907 versus 9335 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 60773 versus 32447 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 208.608 versus 121.124 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2573.643 versus 1958.592 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 16.447 versus 8.452 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 145.886 versus 120.742 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 926.614 versus 510.941 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 16952 versus 11437 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3718 versus 3717 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 versus 1676 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 16952 versus 11437 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3718 versus 3717 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 versus 1676 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 6273 versus 3404 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P2200
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti
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 1660 Ti |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 9335 | 12907 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 905 | 807 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 32447 | 60773 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 121.124 | 208.608 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1958.592 | 2573.643 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 8.452 | 16.447 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 120.742 | 145.886 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 510.941 | 926.614 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 11437 | 16952 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3717 | 3718 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1676 | 3355 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 11437 | 16952 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3717 | 3718 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1676 | 3355 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3404 | 6273 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA Quadro P2200 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Pascal | Turing |
Nom de code | GP106 | TU116 |
Date de sortie | 10 June 2019 | 22 February 2019 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 319 | 214 |
Genre | Workstation | Desktop |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $279 | |
Prix maintenant | $279.99 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 67.32 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1493 MHz | 1770 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 1000 MHz | 1500 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 | 120 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 4400 million | 6,600 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") | 229 mm |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 1x 8-pin |
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 | 12000 MHz |