NVIDIA Quadro T1200 Mobile versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Quadro T1200 Mobile and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 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 T1200 Mobile
- Environ 21% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1425 MHz versus 1178 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 91.20 GTexel/s versus 109 billion / sec
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 12 nm versus 28 nm
- 8.2x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 18 Watt versus 148 Watt
- 178.6x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective) versus 7.0 GB/s
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 39772 versus 28470
- Environ 50% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 157.821 versus 105.107
- Environ 58% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1934.012 versus 1225.96
- Environ 24% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 10.833 versus 8.76
- 3.8x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 136.552 versus 35.714
- Environ 40% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 684.333 versus 489.884
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse augmenté | 1425 MHz versus 1178 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 91.20 GTexel/s versus 109 billion / sec |
Processus de fabrication | 12 nm versus 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 18 Watt versus 148 Watt |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective) versus 7.0 GB/s |
Référence | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 39772 versus 28470 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 157.821 versus 105.107 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1934.012 versus 1225.96 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 10.833 versus 8.76 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 136.552 versus 35.714 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 684.333 versus 489.884 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
- Environ 23% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1050 MHz versus 855 MHz
- Environ 63% de pipelines plus haut: 1664 versus 1024
- Environ 24% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 9633 versus 7777
- Environ 62% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 766 versus 473
- Environ 17% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 11499 versus 9851
- Environ 49% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3698 versus 2476
- Environ 49% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3340 versus 2238
- Environ 17% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 11499 versus 9851
- Environ 49% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3698 versus 2476
- Environ 49% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3340 versus 2238
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 1050 MHz versus 855 MHz |
Pipelines | 1664 versus 1024 |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 9633 versus 7777 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 766 versus 473 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 11499 versus 9851 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3698 versus 2476 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3340 versus 2238 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 11499 versus 9851 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3698 versus 2476 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3340 versus 2238 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro T1200 Mobile
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
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 T1200 Mobile | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 7777 | 9633 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 473 | 766 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 39772 | 28470 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 157.821 | 105.107 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1934.012 | 1225.96 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 10.833 | 8.76 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 136.552 | 35.714 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 684.333 | 489.884 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9851 | 11499 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2476 | 3698 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2238 | 3340 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9851 | 11499 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2476 | 3698 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2238 | 3340 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3631 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA Quadro T1200 Mobile | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Turing | Maxwell 2.0 |
Nom de code | TU117 | GM204 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 362 | 360 |
Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
Date de sortie | 19 September 2014 | |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $329 | |
Prix maintenant | $407.76 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 28.59 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1425 MHz | 1178 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 855 MHz | 1050 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 | 1664 |
Pixel fill rate | 45.60 GPixel/s | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 91.20 GTexel/s | 109 billion / sec |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 18 Watt | 148 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 4700 million | 5,200 million |
Noyaux CUDA | 1664 | |
Performance á point flottant | 3,920 gflops | |
Température maximale du GPU | 98 °C | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort, Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 |
Contribution d’audio pour HDMI | Internal | |
Soutien de G-SYNC | ||
HDCP | ||
Résolution VGA maximale | 2048x1536 | |
Soutien de plusiers moniteurs | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0 | |
Hauteur | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
Longeur | 10.5" (26.7 cm) | |
Énergie du systeme recommandé (PSU) | 500 Watt | |
Options SLI | 4x | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 2x 6-pins | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 (12_1) |
OpenCL | 3.0 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
Shader Model | 6.6 | |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 4 GB | 4 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 160 GB/s | 224 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective) | 7.0 GB/s |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision | ||
Adaptive Vertical Sync | ||
CUDA | ||
GameStream | ||
GameWorks | ||
GeForce Experience | ||
GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
GPU Boost | ||
SLI | ||
Surround |