NVIDIA Quadro P400 versus AMD FirePro W4100
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro P400 and AMD FirePro W4100 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 P400
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 5 mois plus tard
- Environ 95% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1228 MHz versus 630 MHz
- Environ 5% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 21.25 GTexel / s versus 20.16 GTexel / s
- Environ 5% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 679.9 gflops versus 645.1 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 28 nm
- Environ 67% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 30 Watt versus 50 Watt
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1651 versus 1504
- Environ 27% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 19.856 versus 15.65
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 84.489 versus 75.309
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2709 versus 1951
- 2.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3328 versus 1620
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2709 versus 1951
- 2.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3328 versus 1620
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 7 February 2017 versus 13 August 2014 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1228 MHz versus 630 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 21.25 GTexel / s versus 20.16 GTexel / s |
| Performance á point flottant | 679.9 gflops versus 645.1 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt versus 50 Watt |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4012 MHz versus 4000 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1651 versus 1504 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 19.856 versus 15.65 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 84.489 versus 75.309 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2709 versus 1951 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3328 versus 1620 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2709 versus 1951 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3328 versus 1620 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD FirePro W4100
- 2x plus de pipelines: 512 versus 256
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 453 versus 435
- Environ 78% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 5447 versus 3053
- Environ 74% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 538.848 versus 309.824
- Environ 18% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.631 versus 1.38
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 31.533 versus 25.011
- Environ 18% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3399 versus 2875
- Environ 18% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3399 versus 2875
| Caractéristiques | |
| Pipelines | 512 versus 256 |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 453 versus 435 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5447 versus 3053 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 538.848 versus 309.824 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.631 versus 1.38 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 31.533 versus 25.011 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3399 versus 2875 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3399 versus 2875 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P400
GPU 2: AMD FirePro W4100
| 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 P400 | AMD FirePro W4100 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1651 | 1504 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 435 | 453 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3053 | 5447 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 19.856 | 15.65 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 309.824 | 538.848 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.38 | 1.631 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 25.011 | 31.533 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 84.489 | 75.309 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2709 | 1951 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2875 | 3399 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3328 | 1620 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2709 | 1951 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2875 | 3399 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3328 | 1620 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 617 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Quadro P400 | AMD FirePro W4100 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | GCN 1.0 |
| Nom de code | GP107 | Cape Verde |
| Date de sortie | 7 February 2017 | 13 August 2014 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $119.99 | |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 983 | 965 |
| Prix maintenant | $119.99 | |
| Genre | Workstation | Workstation |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 18.70 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1252 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1228 MHz | 630 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 679.9 gflops | 645.1 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 256 | 512 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 21.25 GTexel / s | 20.16 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 3,300 million | 1,500 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 3x mini-DisplayPort | 4x mini-DisplayPort |
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 145 mm | 171 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | |
| Facteur de forme | Low Profile / Half Length | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 32.1 GB / s | 72 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4012 MHz | 4000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| AppAcceleration | ||
| Powerplay | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA Quadro P400 avec des autres
NVIDIAQuadro P400 vs
ATIRadeon HD 2400 PRO
NVIDIAQuadro P400 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 800A
NVIDIAQuadro P400 vs
AMDRadeon R9 M360
NVIDIAQuadro P400 vs
AMDRadeon R8 M445DX
NVIDIAQuadro P400 vs
AMDRadeon 535 Mobile
NVIDIAQuadro P400 vs
NVIDIAGeForce MX230
