NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q versus NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti 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, 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, 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).
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 8 mois plus tard
- 3.1x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 80 Watt versus 250 Watt
Date de sortie | 27 May 2019 versus 20 September 2018 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 80 Watt versus 250 Watt |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
- 2.3x plus de vitesse du noyau: 1350 MHz versus 600 MHz
- Environ 14% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1545 MHz versus 1350 MHz
- Environ 60% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 21784 versus 13640
- Environ 60% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 935 versus 584
- Environ 67% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 138583 versus 83044
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 23659 versus 19377
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 23659 versus 19377
- Environ 85% meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 14599 versus 7879
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 1350 MHz versus 600 MHz |
Vitesse augmenté | 1545 MHz versus 1350 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 21784 versus 13640 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 935 versus 584 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 138583 versus 83044 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 23659 versus 19377 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3718 versus 3717 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 3357 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 23659 versus 19377 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3718 versus 3717 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 3357 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 14599 versus 7879 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
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 |
|
|
Nom | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 13640 | 21784 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 584 | 935 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 83044 | 138583 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 19377 | 23659 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3717 | 3718 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 | 3358 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 19377 | 23659 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3717 | 3718 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 | 3358 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 7879 | 14599 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 394.035 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 5461.22 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 41.133 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 173.697 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1987.605 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Turing | Turing |
Nom de code | TU104 | TU102 |
Date de sortie | 27 May 2019 | 20 September 2018 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 169 | 83 |
Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $999 | |
Prix maintenant | $1,279.99 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 17.22 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1350 MHz | 1545 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 600 MHz | 1350 MHz |
Processus de fabrication | 12 nm | 12 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 259.2 GFLOPS | |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 16.59 TFLOPS | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 8.294 TFLOPS | |
Pipelines | 3072 | |
Pixel fill rate | 86.40 GPixel/s | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 259.2 GTexel/s | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 80 Watt | 250 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 13600 million | 18,600 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 2x 8-pin |
Largeur | IGP | |
Longeur | 267 mm | |
Soutien API |
||
OpenCL | 1.2 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Shader Model | 6.4 | |
Vulkan | ||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | |
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 16 GB | |
Vitesse de mémoire | 14000 MHz |