NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q versus NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q and NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 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 RTX 3000 Max-Q
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 9 mois plus tard
- Environ 1% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1215 MHz versus 1200 MHz
- 4.2x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 60 Watt versus 250 Watt
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3706 versus 3652
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3351 versus 3290
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3706 versus 3652
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3351 versus 3290
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 27 May 2019 versus 13 August 2018 |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1215 MHz versus 1200 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 60 Watt versus 250 Watt |
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3706 versus 3652 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3351 versus 3290 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3706 versus 3652 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3351 versus 3290 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000
- Environ 68% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1005 MHz versus 600 MHz
- 2.3x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 19370 versus 8366
- 2.5x meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 869 versus 343
- 2x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 137748 versus 68305
- Environ 82% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 401.574 versus 220.867
- 3.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 6432.348 versus 2046.214
- 2.7x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 43.914 versus 16.026
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 215.219 versus 94.532
- 3.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 2101.927 versus 645.647
- 2.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 21578 versus 10140
- 2.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 21578 versus 10140
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1005 MHz versus 600 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 19370 versus 8366 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 869 versus 343 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 137748 versus 68305 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 401.574 versus 220.867 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 6432.348 versus 2046.214 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 43.914 versus 16.026 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 215.219 versus 94.532 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 2101.927 versus 645.647 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 21578 versus 10140 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 21578 versus 10140 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000
| 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 RTX 3000 Max-Q | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 8366 | 19370 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 343 | 869 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 68305 | 137748 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 220.867 | 401.574 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2046.214 | 6432.348 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 16.026 | 43.914 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 94.532 | 215.219 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 645.647 | 2101.927 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10140 | 21578 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3706 | 3652 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3351 | 3290 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10140 | 21578 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3706 | 3652 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3351 | 3290 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Turing | Turing |
| Nom de code | TU106 | TU102 |
| Date de sortie | 27 May 2019 | 13 August 2018 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 325 | 103 |
| Genre | Mobile workstation | Workstation |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $9,999 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1215 MHz | 1200 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 600 MHz | 1005 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 12 nm | 12 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 175.0 GFLOPS | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 11.20 TFLOPS | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 5.599 TFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 2304 | |
| Pixel fill rate | 77.76 GPixel/s | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 175.0 GTexel/s | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 60 Watt | 250 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 10800 million | 18,600 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 2x 8-pin |
| Largeur | IGP | |
| Longeur | 267 mm | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 6 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 448 GB/s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 256 bit | |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 14000 MHz | |
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q avec des autres
NVIDIAQuadro RTX 3000 Max-Q vs
ATIRadeon X1950 CrossFire Edition
NVIDIAQuadro RTX 3000 Max-Q vs
ATIFirePro 2450 Multi-View
NVIDIAQuadro RTX 3000 Max-Q vs
NVIDIAGRID K140Q
NVIDIAQuadro RTX 3000 Max-Q vs
AMDRadeon RX Vega M GH
NVIDIAQuadro RTX 3000 Max-Q vs
NVIDIAP102-100
NVIDIAQuadro RTX 3000 Max-Q vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 3 GB
