NVIDIA Quadro T1200 Mobile versus AMD FirePro S9050
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro T1200 Mobile and AMD FirePro S9050 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 T1200 Mobile
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 91.20 GTexel/s versus 100.8 GTexel / s
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 12 nm versus 28 nm
- 12.5x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 18 Watt versus 225 Watt
- Environ 60% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 7858 versus 4901
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 466 versus 369
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 157.821 versus 68.324
- Environ 32% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1934.012 versus 1463.376
- Environ 67% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 10.833 versus 6.491
- Environ 50% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 136.552 versus 91.133
- Environ 99% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 684.333 versus 344.551
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 9851 versus 7062
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 9851 versus 7062
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 91.20 GTexel/s versus 100.8 GTexel / s |
| Processus de fabrication | 12 nm versus 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 18 Watt versus 225 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7858 versus 4901 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 466 versus 369 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 157.821 versus 68.324 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1934.012 versus 1463.376 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 10.833 versus 6.491 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 136.552 versus 91.133 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 684.333 versus 344.551 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9851 versus 7062 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9851 versus 7062 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD FirePro S9050
- Environ 5% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 900 MHz versus 855 MHz
- Environ 75% de pipelines plus haut: 1792 versus 1024
- 3x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 12 GB versus 4 GB
- 4.4x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 5500 MHz versus 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective)
- 2.5x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 6260 versus 2476
- 5.8x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 13032 versus 2238
- 2.5x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 6260 versus 2476
- 5.8x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 13032 versus 2238
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 900 MHz versus 855 MHz |
| Pipelines | 1792 versus 1024 |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 12 GB versus 4 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 5500 MHz versus 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective) |
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 6260 versus 2476 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 13032 versus 2238 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 6260 versus 2476 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 13032 versus 2238 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro T1200 Mobile
GPU 2: AMD FirePro S9050
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| 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 T1200 Mobile | AMD FirePro S9050 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7858 | 4901 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 466 | 369 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 39004 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 157.821 | 68.324 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1934.012 | 1463.376 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 10.833 | 6.491 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 136.552 | 91.133 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 684.333 | 344.551 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9851 | 7062 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2476 | 6260 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2238 | 13032 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9851 | 7062 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2476 | 6260 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2238 | 13032 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Quadro T1200 Mobile | AMD FirePro S9050 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Turing | GCN 1.0 |
| Nom de code | TU117 | Tahiti |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 371 | 374 |
| Genre | Laptop | Workstation |
| Date de sortie | 7 August 2014 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1425 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 855 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 91.20 GFLOPS (1:32) | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 5.837 TFLOPS (2:1) | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 2.918 TFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 1024 | 1792 |
| Pixel fill rate | 45.60 GPixel/s | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 91.20 GTexel/s | 100.8 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 18 Watt | 225 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 4700 million | 4,313 million |
| Performance á point flottant | 3,226 gflops | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 1x DisplayPort |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | |
| Facteur de forme | Full Height / Full Length | |
| Longeur | 254 mm | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 8-pin | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 (11_1) |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 6.6 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 12 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 160 GB/s | 264 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective) | 5500 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA Quadro T1200 Mobile avec des autres
NVIDIAQuadro T1200 Mobile vs
NVIDIAQuadro K6000
NVIDIAQuadro T1200 Mobile vs
AMDFirePro S9050
NVIDIAQuadro T1200 Mobile vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1060 3 GB
NVIDIAQuadro T1200 Mobile vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650
NVIDIAQuadro T1200 Mobile vs
NVIDIAQuadro T1000 Max-Q
NVIDIAQuadro T1200 Mobile vs
IntelArc A570M
