NVIDIA Quadro P2200 versus NVIDIA Quadro P4000
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro P2200 and NVIDIA Quadro P4000 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 P2200
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 4 mois plus tard
- Environ 1% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1493 MHz versus 1480 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 119.4 GTexel/s versus 165.8 GTexel / s
- Environ 33% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 75 Watt versus 100 Watt
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 892 versus 795
- Environ 23% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1958.592 versus 1590.392
- 2.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 120.742 versus 45.977
- 3.1x meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3404 versus 1115
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 10 June 2019 versus 6 February 2017 |
Vitesse augmenté | 1493 MHz versus 1480 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 119.4 GTexel/s versus 165.8 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt versus 100 Watt |
Référence | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 892 versus 795 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1958.592 versus 1590.392 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 120.742 versus 45.977 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3717 versus 3714 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3717 versus 3714 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3404 versus 1115 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro P4000
- Environ 20% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1202 MHz versus 1000 MHz
- Environ 40% de pipelines plus haut: 1792 versus 1280
- Environ 60% plus de taille maximale de mémoire: 8 GB versus 5 GB
- Environ 23% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 11545 versus 9372
- Environ 31% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 42289 versus 32343
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 152.325 versus 121.124
- Environ 34% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 11.365 versus 8.452
- Environ 47% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 751.626 versus 510.941
- Environ 33% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 15267 versus 11437
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 versus 1676
- Environ 33% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 15267 versus 11437
- 2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 versus 1676
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 1202 MHz versus 1000 MHz |
Pipelines | 1792 versus 1280 |
Taille de mémore maximale | 8 GB versus 5 GB |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 11545 versus 9372 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 42289 versus 32343 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 152.325 versus 121.124 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 11.365 versus 8.452 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 751.626 versus 510.941 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 15267 versus 11437 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 1676 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 15267 versus 11437 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 1676 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P2200
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro P4000
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 Quadro P4000 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 9372 | 11545 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 892 | 795 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 32343 | 42289 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 121.124 | 152.325 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1958.592 | 1590.392 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 8.452 | 11.365 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 120.742 | 45.977 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 510.941 | 751.626 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 11437 | 15267 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3717 | 3714 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1676 | 3358 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 11437 | 15267 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3717 | 3714 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1676 | 3358 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3404 | 1115 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA Quadro P2200 | NVIDIA Quadro P4000 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Pascal | Pascal |
Nom de code | GP106 | GP104 |
Date de sortie | 10 June 2019 | 6 February 2017 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 307 | 287 |
Genre | Workstation | Workstation |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $815 | |
Prix maintenant | $799.99 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 17.17 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1493 MHz | 1480 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 1000 MHz | 1202 MHz |
Processus de fabrication | 16 nm | 16 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 | 1792 |
Pixel fill rate | 59.72 GPixel/s | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 119.4 GTexel/s | 165.8 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 100 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 4400 million | 7,200 million |
Performance á point flottant | 5,304 gflops | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | 4x DisplayPort | 4x DisplayPort |
Display Port | 1.4 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Longeur | 201 mm (7.9") | 241 mm |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 1x 6-pin |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 | 12 |
OpenCL | 1.2 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Shader Model | 6.4 | 5.1 |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 5 GB | 8 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 200.2 GB/s | 192 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 160 bit | 256 Bit |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5X | GDDR5 |
Vitesse de mémoire | 7604 MHz | |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Stereo | ||
Mosaic | ||
nView Display Management | ||
Optimus |