NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 versus NVIDIA Quadro P5000
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 and NVIDIA Quadro P5000 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 RTX 8000
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 10 mois plus tard
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 12 nm versus 16 nm
- Environ 55% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 14000 MHz versus 9016 MHz
- Environ 56% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 19370 versus 12406
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 869 versus 670
- 2.8x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 137748 versus 49641
- Environ 80% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 401.574 versus 223.558
- 2.4x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 6432.348 versus 2698.914
- 3.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 43.914 versus 14.206
- Environ 53% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 215.219 versus 140.845
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 2101.927 versus 927.006
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 21578 versus 15489
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3652 versus 3409
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3290 versus 3077
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 21578 versus 15489
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3652 versus 3409
- Environ 7% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3290 versus 3077
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 13 August 2018 versus 1 October 2016 |
Processus de fabrication | 12 nm versus 16 nm |
Vitesse de mémoire | 14000 MHz versus 9016 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 19370 versus 12406 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 869 versus 670 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 137748 versus 49641 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 401.574 versus 223.558 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 6432.348 versus 2698.914 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 43.914 versus 14.206 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 215.219 versus 140.845 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 2101.927 versus 927.006 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 21578 versus 15489 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3652 versus 3409 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3290 versus 3077 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 21578 versus 15489 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3652 versus 3409 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3290 versus 3077 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro P5000
- Environ 60% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1607 MHz versus 1005 MHz
- Environ 44% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1733 MHz versus 1200 MHz
- 2.5x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 100 Watt versus 250 Watt
Vitesse du noyau | 1607 MHz versus 1005 MHz |
Vitesse augmenté | 1733 MHz versus 1200 MHz |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt versus 250 Watt |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro P5000
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 8000 | NVIDIA Quadro P5000 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 19370 | 12406 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 869 | 670 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 137748 | 49641 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 401.574 | 223.558 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 6432.348 | 2698.914 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 43.914 | 14.206 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 215.219 | 140.845 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 2101.927 | 927.006 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 21578 | 15489 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3652 | 3409 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3290 | 3077 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 21578 | 15489 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3652 | 3409 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3290 | 3077 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 | 6008 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 | NVIDIA Quadro P5000 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Turing | Pascal |
Nom de code | TU102 | GP104 |
Date de sortie | 13 August 2018 | 1 October 2016 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $9,999 | $2,499 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 103 | 232 |
Genre | Workstation | Workstation |
Prix maintenant | $1,699.99 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 8.38 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1200 MHz | 1733 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 1005 MHz | 1607 MHz |
Processus de fabrication | 12 nm | 16 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 250 Watt | 100 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 18,600 million | 7,200 million |
Performance á point flottant | 8,873 gflops | |
Pipelines | 2048 | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 277.3 GTexel / s | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | 3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C | 1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort |
Display Port | 1.4 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Longeur | 267 mm | 267 mm |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 2x 8-pin | 1x 8-pin |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Shader Model | 5.1 | |
Mémoire |
||
Vitesse de mémoire | 14000 MHz | 9016 MHz |
RAM maximale | 16 GB | |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 192 GB / s | |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 256 Bit | |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Stereo | ||
3D Vision Pro | ||
Mosaic | ||
nView | ||
nView Display Management | ||
Optimus |