NVIDIA Quadro P400 versus NVIDIA Quadro 2000
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro P400 and NVIDIA Quadro 2000 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 P400
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 6 ans 1 mois plus tard
- Environ 96% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1228 MHz versus 625 MHz
- Environ 6% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 21.25 GTexel / s versus 20 GTexel / s
- Environ 33% de pipelines plus haut: 256 versus 192
- Environ 42% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 679.9 gflops versus 480.0 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 40 nm
- 2.1x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 30 Watt versus 62 Watt
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 2 GB versus 1 GB
- Environ 54% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 4012 MHz versus 2600 MHz
- Environ 74% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1651 versus 947
- Environ 44% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 435 versus 303
- Environ 94% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 19.856 versus 10.229
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 309.824 versus 258.26
- Environ 56% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.38 versus 0.885
- Environ 83% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 25.011 versus 13.688
- 4.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 84.489 versus 19.02
- Environ 69% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2709 versus 1600
- Environ 71% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2875 versus 1682
- Environ 25% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3328 versus 2668
- Environ 69% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2709 versus 1600
- Environ 71% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2875 versus 1682
- Environ 25% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3328 versus 2668
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 7 February 2017 versus 24 December 2010 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1228 MHz versus 625 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 21.25 GTexel / s versus 20 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 256 versus 192 |
| Performance á point flottant | 679.9 gflops versus 480.0 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 40 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt versus 62 Watt |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 2 GB versus 1 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4012 MHz versus 2600 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1651 versus 947 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 435 versus 303 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 19.856 versus 10.229 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 309.824 versus 258.26 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.38 versus 0.885 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 25.011 versus 13.688 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 84.489 versus 19.02 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2709 versus 1600 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2875 versus 1682 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3328 versus 2668 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2709 versus 1600 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2875 versus 1682 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3328 versus 2668 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro 2000
- Environ 27% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 3879 versus 3053
| Référence | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3879 versus 3053 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P400
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro 2000
| 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 | NVIDIA Quadro 2000 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1651 | 947 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 435 | 303 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3053 | 3879 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 19.856 | 10.229 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 309.824 | 258.26 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.38 | 0.885 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 25.011 | 13.688 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 84.489 | 19.02 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2709 | 1600 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2875 | 1682 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3328 | 2668 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2709 | 1600 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2875 | 1682 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3328 | 2668 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 617 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Quadro P400 | NVIDIA Quadro 2000 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | Fermi |
| Nom de code | GP107 | GF106 |
| Date de sortie | 7 February 2017 | 24 December 2010 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $119.99 | $599 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 983 | 1287 |
| Prix maintenant | $119.99 | $87.99 |
| Genre | Workstation | Workstation |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 18.70 | 17.65 |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1252 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1228 MHz | 625 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 679.9 gflops | 480.0 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 256 | 192 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 21.25 GTexel / s | 20 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt | 62 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 3,300 million | 1,170 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 3x mini-DisplayPort | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 145 mm | 178 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 1 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 32.1 GB / s | 41.6 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4012 MHz | 2600 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
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
