NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile versus NVIDIA Quadro P4000
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile and NVIDIA Quadro P4000 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 23% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1815 MHz versus 1480 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 145.2 GTexel/s versus 165.8 GTexel / s
- Environ 43% de pipelines plus haut: 2560 versus 1792
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 8 nm versus 16 nm
- Environ 5% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 95 Watt versus 100 Watt
- Environ 34% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 56602 versus 42289
- Environ 33% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 202.984 versus 152.325
- Environ 34% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 2138.158 versus 1590.392
- Environ 45% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 16.498 versus 11.365
- 3.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 151.433 versus 45.977
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse augmenté | 1815 MHz versus 1480 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 145.2 GTexel/s versus 165.8 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 2560 versus 1792 |
Processus de fabrication | 8 nm versus 16 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 95 Watt versus 100 Watt |
Référence | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 56602 versus 42289 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 202.984 versus 152.325 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2138.158 versus 1590.392 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 16.498 versus 11.365 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 151.433 versus 45.977 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro P4000
- Environ 64% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1202 MHz versus 735 MHz
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 8 GB versus 4 GB
- 5.1x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 7604 MHz versus 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective)
- Environ 17% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 11603 versus 9903
- Environ 65% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 806 versus 488
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 751.626 versus 729.947
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 15267 versus 12750
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 15267 versus 12750
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 1202 MHz versus 735 MHz |
Taille de mémore maximale | 8 GB versus 4 GB |
Vitesse de mémoire | 7604 MHz versus 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 11603 versus 9903 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 806 versus 488 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 751.626 versus 729.947 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 15267 versus 12750 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 versus 3708 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 3355 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 15267 versus 12750 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 versus 3708 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 3355 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro P4000
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 Quadro P4000 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 9903 | 11603 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 488 | 806 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 56602 | 42289 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 202.984 | 152.325 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2138.158 | 1590.392 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 16.498 | 11.365 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 151.433 | 45.977 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 729.947 | 751.626 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12750 | 15267 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3708 | 3714 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 | 3358 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12750 | 15267 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3708 | 3714 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 | 3358 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 4904 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile | NVIDIA Quadro P4000 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Ampere | Pascal |
Nom de code | GA106 | GP104 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 274 | 277 |
Date de sortie | 6 February 2017 | |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $815 | |
Prix maintenant | $799.99 | |
Genre | Workstation | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 17.17 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1815 MHz | 1480 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 735 MHz | 1202 MHz |
Processus de fabrication | 8 nm | 16 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 | 1792 |
Pixel fill rate | 87.12 GPixel/s | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 145.2 GTexel/s | 165.8 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 95 Watt | 100 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 13250 million | 7,200 million |
Performance á point flottant | 5,304 gflops | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 4x DisplayPort |
Display Port | 1.4 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 1x 6-pin |
Longeur | 241 mm | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.2 | 12 |
OpenCL | 3.0 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Shader Model | 6.6 | 5.1 |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 4 GB | 8 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 192 GB/s | 192 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | 256 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) | 7604 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Stereo | ||
Mosaic | ||
nView Display Management | ||
Optimus |