NVIDIA Quadro P4000 versus AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro P4000 and AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 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 P4000
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 mois plus tard
- Environ 1% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1202 MHz versus 1188 MHz
- Environ 19% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1480 MHz versus 1243 MHz
- Environ 30% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 100 Watt versus 130 Watt
- Environ 9% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 7604 MHz versus 7000 MHz
- Environ 48% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 11653 versus 7885
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 827 versus 812
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 42289 versus 38420
- Environ 32% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 152.325 versus 115.834
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 11.365 versus 10.152
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 751.626 versus 597.677
- Environ 48% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 15267 versus 10320
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3714 versus 3575
- Environ 48% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 15267 versus 10320
- Environ 4% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3714 versus 3575
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 6 February 2017 versus 10 November 2016 |
Vitesse du noyau | 1202 MHz versus 1188 MHz |
Vitesse augmenté | 1480 MHz versus 1243 MHz |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt versus 130 Watt |
Vitesse de mémoire | 7604 MHz versus 7000 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 11653 versus 7885 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 827 versus 812 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 42289 versus 38420 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 152.325 versus 115.834 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 11.365 versus 10.152 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 751.626 versus 597.677 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 15267 versus 10320 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 versus 3575 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 3347 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 15267 versus 10320 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 versus 3575 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 3347 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100
- Environ 8% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 179.0 GTexel / s versus 165.8 GTexel / s
- Environ 29% de pipelines plus haut: 2304 versus 1792
- Environ 8% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 5,728 gflops versus 5,304 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 14 nm versus 16 nm
- Environ 25% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1987.633 versus 1590.392
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 105.263 versus 45.977
Caractéristiques | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 179.0 GTexel / s versus 165.8 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 2304 versus 1792 |
Performance á point flottant | 5,728 gflops versus 5,304 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 14 nm versus 16 nm |
Référence | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1987.633 versus 1590.392 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 105.263 versus 45.977 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P4000
GPU 2: AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100
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 P4000 | AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 11653 | 7885 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 827 | 812 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 42289 | 38420 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 152.325 | 115.834 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1590.392 | 1987.633 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 11.365 | 10.152 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 45.977 | 105.263 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 751.626 | 597.677 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 15267 | 10320 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 | 3575 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3347 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 15267 | 10320 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 | 3575 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3347 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 4904 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA Quadro P4000 | AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Pascal | GCN 4.0 |
Nom de code | GP104 | Ellesmere |
Date de sortie | 6 February 2017 | 10 November 2016 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $815 | $799 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 275 | 309 |
Prix maintenant | $799.99 | $539.99 |
Genre | Workstation | Workstation |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 17.17 | 19.25 |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1480 MHz | 1243 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 1202 MHz | 1188 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 5,304 gflops | 5,728 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 16 nm | 14 nm |
Pipelines | 1792 | 2304 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 165.8 GTexel / s | 179.0 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt | 130 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 7,200 million | 5,700 million |
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 | 241 mm | 241 mm |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 6-pin | 1x 6-pin |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12 | 12.0 (12_0) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Shader Model | 5.1 | |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 8 GB | 8 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 192 GB / s | 224.0 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 7604 MHz | 7000 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
3D Stereo | ||
Mosaic | ||
nView Display Management | ||
Optimus | ||
DisplayPort 1.3 HBR / 1.4 HDR Ready | ||
FreeSync | ||
HDMI 2.0 |