NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile versus NVIDIA Tesla T4
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile and NVIDIA Tesla T4 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 RTX A2000 Mobile
- Environ 20% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1815 MHz versus 1515 MHz
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 8 nm versus 12 nm
- Environ 59% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 202.984 versus 127.622
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 151.433 versus 119.936
- Environ 88% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3708 versus 1976
- Environ 88% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3355 versus 1781
- Environ 88% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3708 versus 1976
- Environ 88% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3355 versus 1781
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1815 MHz versus 1515 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 8 nm versus 12 nm |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 202.984 versus 127.622 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 151.433 versus 119.936 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3708 versus 1976 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 versus 1781 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3708 versus 1976 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 versus 1781 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Tesla T4
- Environ 37% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1005 MHz versus 735 MHz
- Environ 27% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 75 Watt versus 95 Watt
- 6.7x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 10000 MHz versus 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective)
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 10744 versus 9926
- Environ 23% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 590 versus 481
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 61276 versus 56665
- Environ 42% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 3026.812 versus 2138.158
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 18.798 versus 16.498
- Environ 25% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 910.721 versus 729.947
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 14076 versus 12750
- Environ 10% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 14076 versus 12750
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1005 MHz versus 735 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt versus 95 Watt |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 10000 MHz versus 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 10744 versus 9926 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 590 versus 481 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 61276 versus 56665 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3026.812 versus 2138.158 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 18.798 versus 16.498 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 910.721 versus 729.947 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 14076 versus 12750 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 14076 versus 12750 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile
GPU 2: NVIDIA Tesla T4
| 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 Tesla T4 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 9926 | 10744 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 481 | 590 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 56665 | 61276 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 202.984 | 127.622 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2138.158 | 3026.812 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 16.498 | 18.798 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 151.433 | 119.936 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 729.947 | 910.721 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12750 | 14076 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3708 | 1976 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 | 1781 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12750 | 14076 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3708 | 1976 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 | 1781 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile | NVIDIA Tesla T4 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Ampere | Turing |
| Nom de code | GA106 | TU104 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 282 | 279 |
| Date de sortie | 13 September 2018 | |
| Genre | Workstation | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1815 MHz | 1515 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 735 MHz | 1005 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 8 nm | 12 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 | |
| Pixel fill rate | 87.12 GPixel/s | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 145.2 GTexel/s | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 95 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 13250 million | 13,600 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.2 | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.6 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 192 GB/s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 bit | |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) | 10000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | 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
AMDRadeon 550
NVIDIARTX A2000 Mobile vs
AMDRadeon RX 6500M
