NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile versus AMD Radeon R9 390
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile and AMD Radeon R9 390 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 RTX A2000 Mobile
- Environ 82% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1815 MHz versus 1000 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 145.2 GTexel/s versus 160.0 GTexel / s
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 8 nm versus 28 nm
- 2.9x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 95 Watt versus 275 Watt
- Environ 50% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) versus 1000 MHz
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 9962 versus 8928
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 56990 versus 44120
- Environ 69% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 202.984 versus 120.267
- Environ 49% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 16.498 versus 11.097
- Environ 30% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 151.433 versus 116.473
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 729.947 versus 607.381
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 12750 versus 10445
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 12750 versus 10445
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1815 MHz versus 1000 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 145.2 GTexel/s versus 160.0 GTexel / s |
| Processus de fabrication | 8 nm versus 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 95 Watt versus 275 Watt |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) versus 1000 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 9962 versus 8928 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 56990 versus 44120 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 202.984 versus 120.267 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 16.498 versus 11.097 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 151.433 versus 116.473 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 729.947 versus 607.381 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12750 versus 10445 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 versus 3353 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12750 versus 10445 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 versus 3353 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 390
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 8 GB versus 4 GB
- Environ 68% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 799 versus 476
- Environ 48% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 3164.164 versus 2138.158
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 8 GB versus 4 GB |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 799 versus 476 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3164.164 versus 2138.158 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 390
| 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 RTX A2000 Mobile | AMD Radeon R9 390 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 9962 | 8928 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 476 | 799 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 56990 | 44120 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 202.984 | 120.267 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2138.158 | 3164.164 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 16.498 | 11.097 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 151.433 | 116.473 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 729.947 | 607.381 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12750 | 10445 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3708 | 3708 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 | 3353 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12750 | 10445 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3708 | 3708 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 | 3353 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3957 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile | AMD Radeon R9 390 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Ampere | GCN 2.0 |
| Nom de code | GA106 | Grenada |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 267 | 296 |
| Conception | AMD Radeon R9 300 Series | |
| Date de sortie | 18 June 2015 | |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $329 | |
| Genre | Desktop | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1815 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 735 MHz | |
| Processus de fabrication | 8 nm | 28 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 145.2 GFLOPS (1:64) | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 9.293 TFLOPS (1:1) | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 9.293 TFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 2560 | 2560 |
| Pixel fill rate | 87.12 GPixel/s | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 145.2 GTexel/s | 160.0 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 95 Watt | 275 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 13250 million | 6,200 million |
| Unités de Compute | 40 | |
| Performance á point flottant | 5,120 gflops | |
| Stream Processors | 2560 | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Nombre d’écrans Eyefinity | 6 | |
| VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 1 x 6-pin, 1 x 8-pin |
| Bridgeless CrossFire | ||
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | |
| Longeur | 275 mm | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.2 | 12 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 2.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 6.6 | |
| Vulkan | ||
| Mantle | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 8 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 192 GB/s | 384 GB/s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | 512 bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) | 1000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire de la bande passante haute (HBM) | ||
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| DDMA audio | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| HD3D | ||
| HDMI 4K Support | ||
| LiquidVR | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
| Virtual Super Resolution (VSR) | ||
| ZeroCore | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile avec des autres
NVIDIARTX A2000 Mobile vs
AMDRadeon HD 6610M
NVIDIARTX A2000 Mobile vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1080 (Desktop)
NVIDIARTX A2000 Mobile vs
NVIDIAQuadro P3200 Max-Q
NVIDIARTX A2000 Mobile vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
NVIDIARTX A2000 Mobile vs
NVIDIAGeForce RTX 3050 Ti
NVIDIARTX A2000 Mobile vs
AMDRadeon Pro W6600M
