NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER 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 RTX A2000 Mobile
- Environ 5% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1815 MHz versus 1725 MHz
- Environ 5% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 145.2 GTexel/s versus 138.0 GTexel/s
- 2x plus de pipelines: 2560 versus 1280
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 8 nm versus 12 nm
- Environ 5% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 95 Watt versus 100 Watt
- Environ 2% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 56649 versus 55741
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 202.984 versus 178.014
- Environ 9% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 2138.158 versus 1961.932
- Environ 48% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 16.498 versus 11.169
- Environ 39% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 151.433 versus 109.29
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1815 MHz versus 1725 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 145.2 GTexel/s versus 138.0 GTexel/s |
| Pipelines | 2560 versus 1280 |
| Processus de fabrication | 8 nm versus 12 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 95 Watt versus 100 Watt |
| Référence | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 56649 versus 55741 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 202.984 versus 178.014 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2138.158 versus 1961.932 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 16.498 versus 11.169 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 151.433 versus 109.29 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
- 2.1x plus de vitesse du noyau: 1530 MHz versus 735 MHz
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 10167 versus 9906
- Environ 55% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 750 versus 485
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 787.025 versus 729.947
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 13569 versus 12750
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 13569 versus 12750
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1530 MHz versus 735 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 10167 versus 9906 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 750 versus 485 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 787.025 versus 729.947 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 13569 versus 12750 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 versus 3708 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 versus 3355 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 13569 versus 12750 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 versus 3708 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 versus 3355 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
| 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 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 9906 | 10167 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 485 | 750 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 56649 | 55741 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 202.984 | 178.014 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2138.158 | 1961.932 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 16.498 | 11.169 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 151.433 | 109.29 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 729.947 | 787.025 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12750 | 13569 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3708 | 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 | 3357 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12750 | 13569 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3708 | 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 | 3357 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 4663 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Ampere | Turing |
| Nom de code | GA106 | TU116 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 282 | 279 |
| Date de sortie | 22 Nov 2019 | |
| Genre | Desktop | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1815 MHz | 1725 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 735 MHz | 1530 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 8 nm | 12 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 145.2 GFLOPS (1:64) | 138.0 GFLOPS (1:32) |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 9.293 TFLOPS (1:1) | 8.832 TFLOPS (2:1) |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 9.293 TFLOPS | 4.416 TFLOPS |
| Pipelines | 2560 | 1280 |
| Pixel fill rate | 87.12 GPixel/s | 55.20 GPixel/s |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 145.2 GTexel/s | 138.0 GTexel/s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 95 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 13250 million | 6600 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 1xDVI, 1xHDMI, 1xDisplayPort |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| HDMI | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 1x 6-pin |
| Longeur | 9 inches (229 mm) | |
| Énergie du systeme recommandé (PSU) | 350 Watt | |
| Largeur | Dual-slot | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.2 | 12.1 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.6 | 6.4 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 192 GB/s | 192 GB/s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | 128 bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) | |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile avec des autres
NVIDIARTX A2000 Mobile vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1070 (Desktop)
NVIDIARTX A2000 Mobile vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1060 Mobile 6 GB
NVIDIARTX A2000 Mobile vs
AMDRadeon RX 560X Mobile
NVIDIARTX A2000 Mobile vs
NVIDIATesla T4
NVIDIARTX A2000 Mobile vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
NVIDIARTX A2000 Mobile vs
AMDRadeon RX 6500M
