NVIDIA Quadro P400 versus NVIDIA Quadro K420
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro P400 and NVIDIA Quadro K420 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 6 mois plus tard
- Environ 40% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1228 MHz versus 876 MHz
- Environ 52% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 21.25 GTexel / s versus 14.02 GTexel / s
- Environ 33% de pipelines plus haut: 256 versus 192
- 2x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 679.9 gflops versus 336.4 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 28 nm
- Environ 37% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 30 Watt versus 41 Watt
- 2048x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 2 GB versus 1 GB / 2 GB
- 2.3x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 4012 MHz versus 1782 MHz
- 2.3x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 1651 versus 733
- Environ 51% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 435 versus 288
- Environ 66% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 3053 versus 1843
- 3.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 19.856 versus 6
- Environ 66% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 309.824 versus 186.605
- 3.2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.38 versus 0.433
- 2.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 25.011 versus 10.365
- 4.8x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 84.489 versus 17.75
- 2.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2709 versus 1245
- 4.8x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2875 versus 598
- 2.7x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3328 versus 1241
- 2.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2709 versus 1245
- 4.8x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2875 versus 598
- 2.7x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3328 versus 1241
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 7 February 2017 versus 22 July 2014 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1228 MHz versus 876 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 21.25 GTexel / s versus 14.02 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 256 versus 192 |
| Performance á point flottant | 679.9 gflops versus 336.4 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt versus 41 Watt |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 2 GB versus 1 GB / 2 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4012 MHz versus 1782 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1651 versus 733 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 435 versus 288 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3053 versus 1843 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 19.856 versus 6 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 309.824 versus 186.605 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.38 versus 0.433 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 25.011 versus 10.365 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 84.489 versus 17.75 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2709 versus 1245 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2875 versus 598 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3328 versus 1241 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2709 versus 1245 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2875 versus 598 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3328 versus 1241 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P400
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K420
| 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 K420 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1651 | 733 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 435 | 288 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3053 | 1843 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 19.856 | 6 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 309.824 | 186.605 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.38 | 0.433 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 25.011 | 10.365 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 84.489 | 17.75 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2709 | 1245 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2875 | 598 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3328 | 1241 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2709 | 1245 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2875 | 598 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3328 | 1241 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 617 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Quadro P400 | NVIDIA Quadro K420 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | Kepler |
| Nom de code | GP107 | GK107 |
| Date de sortie | 7 February 2017 | 22 July 2014 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $119.99 | $96.67 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 983 | 1467 |
| Prix maintenant | $119.99 | $89.99 |
| Genre | Workstation | Workstation |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 18.70 | 10.27 |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1252 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1228 MHz | 876 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 679.9 gflops | 336.4 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 256 | 192 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 21.25 GTexel / s | 14.02 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt | 41 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 3,300 million | 1,270 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 3x mini-DisplayPort | DVI-I DP, 1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort |
| Nombre d’écrans á la fois | 4 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 145 mm | 160 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
| Largeur | 1" (2.5 cm) | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 5 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 1 GB / 2 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 32.1 GB / s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 4012 MHz | 1782 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | 128 Bit |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView Desktop Management | ||
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
