NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q versus NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q and NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB 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).
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 11 mois plus tard
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 175.0 GTexel/s versus 438.4 GTexel / s
- 4.2x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 60 Watt versus 250 Watt
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 94.532 versus 73.167
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 27 May 2019 versus 21 June 2017 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 175.0 GTexel/s versus 438.4 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 60 Watt versus 250 Watt |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 94.532 versus 73.167 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB
- 2.2x plus de vitesse du noyau: 1312 MHz versus 600 MHz
- Environ 26% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1530 MHz versus 1215 MHz
- 2.2x plus de pipelines: 5120 versus 2304
- 2.7x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 16 GB versus 6 GB
- Environ 94% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 16235 versus 8366
- Environ 18% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 406 versus 343
- 2.6x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 180318 versus 68305
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 500.053 versus 220.867
- 3.5x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 7209.392 versus 2046.214
- 2.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 41.826 versus 16.026
- Environ 94% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 1253.829 versus 645.647
- Environ 61% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 16337 versus 10140
- Environ 61% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 16337 versus 10140
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1312 MHz versus 600 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1530 MHz versus 1215 MHz |
| Pipelines | 5120 versus 2304 |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 16 GB versus 6 GB |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 16235 versus 8366 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 406 versus 343 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 180318 versus 68305 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 500.053 versus 220.867 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 7209.392 versus 2046.214 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 41.826 versus 16.026 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1253.829 versus 645.647 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 16337 versus 10140 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3719 versus 3706 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3360 versus 3351 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 16337 versus 10140 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3719 versus 3706 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3360 versus 3351 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q
GPU 2: NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB
| 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 Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 8366 | 16235 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 343 | 406 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 68305 | 180318 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 220.867 | 500.053 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2046.214 | 7209.392 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 16.026 | 41.826 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 94.532 | 73.167 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 645.647 | 1253.829 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10140 | 16337 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3706 | 3719 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3351 | 3360 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10140 | 16337 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3706 | 3719 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3351 | 3360 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q | NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Turing | Volta |
| Nom de code | TU106 | GV100 |
| Date de sortie | 27 May 2019 | 21 June 2017 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 325 | 135 |
| Genre | Mobile workstation | Workstation |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1215 MHz | 1530 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 600 MHz | 1312 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 | 5120 |
| Pixel fill rate | 77.76 GPixel/s | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 175.0 GTexel/s | 438.4 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 60 Watt | 250 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 10800 million | 21,100 million |
| Performance á point flottant | 14,029 gflops | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
| Largeur | IGP | |
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 | 16 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 448 GB/s | 897.0 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 256 bit | 4096 Bit |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | HBM2 |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1752 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
