NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 versus NVIDIA Quadro M2200 Mobile
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 and NVIDIA Quadro M2200 Mobile 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 5000
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 7 mois plus tard
- Environ 58% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1620 MHz versus 1025 MHz
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 12 nm versus 28 nm
- 2.5x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 14000 MHz versus 5500 MHz
- 3.7x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 15652 versus 4284
- Environ 86% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 705 versus 380
- 6.4x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 105171 versus 16429
- 3.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 19811 versus 6337
- 3.1x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 19811 versus 6337
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 13 August 2018 versus 11 January 2017 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1620 MHz versus 1025 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 12 nm versus 28 nm |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 14000 MHz versus 5500 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 15652 versus 4284 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 705 versus 380 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 105171 versus 16429 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 19811 versus 6337 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3719 versus 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 19811 versus 6337 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3719 versus 3715 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro M2200 Mobile
- 3.6x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 55 Watt versus 200 Watt
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 55 Watt versus 200 Watt |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro M2200 Mobile
| 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) |
|
|
| Nom | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 | NVIDIA Quadro M2200 Mobile |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 15652 | 4284 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 705 | 380 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 105171 | 16429 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 270.203 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3728.248 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 26.999 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 110.761 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1370.281 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 19811 | 6337 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3719 | 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 19811 | 6337 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3719 | 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3358 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 10685 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 | NVIDIA Quadro M2200 Mobile | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Turing | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Nom de code | TU104 | GM206 |
| Date de sortie | 13 August 2018 | 11 January 2017 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $2,299 | |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 138 | 473 |
| Genre | Workstation | Workstation |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1815 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1620 MHz | 1025 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 200 Watt | 55 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 13,600 million | 2,940 million |
| Performance á point flottant | 2,099 gflops | |
| Pipelines | 1024 | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 65.6 GTexel / s | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-A (3.0) |
| Longeur | 267 mm | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Mémoire |
||
| Vitesse de mémoire | 14000 MHz | 5500 MHz |
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 88 GB / s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | |
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 avec des autres
NVIDIAQuadro RTX 5000 vs
NVIDIAGeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q
NVIDIAQuadro RTX 5000 vs
NVIDIAGeForce RTX 3080 Max-Q
NVIDIAQuadro RTX 5000 vs
NVIDIAT1000 8 GB
NVIDIAQuadro RTX 5000 vs
AMDRadeon RX 7600M XT
NVIDIAQuadro RTX 5000 vs
AMDRadeon PRO W6300
NVIDIAQuadro RTX 5000 vs
NVIDIARTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation
