NVIDIA RTX A5000 versus NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA RTX A5000 and NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 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 A5000
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 7 mois plus tard
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 8 nm versus 12 nm
- Environ 43% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 22961 versus 16029
- Environ 38% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 1039 versus 751
- Environ 47% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 154648 versus 105171
- 2.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 581.432 versus 226.447
- Environ 64% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 6836.931 versus 4161.764
- 2.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 54.372 versus 25.476
- Environ 62% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 191.518 versus 118.544
- Environ 84% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 2038.811 versus 1106.12
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 22508 versus 19811
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 22508 versus 19811
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 12 Apr 2021 versus 13 August 2018 |
Processus de fabrication | 8 nm versus 12 nm |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 22961 versus 16029 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 1039 versus 751 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 154648 versus 105171 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 581.432 versus 226.447 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 6836.931 versus 4161.764 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 54.372 versus 25.476 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 191.518 versus 118.544 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 2038.811 versus 1106.12 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 22508 versus 19811 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 22508 versus 19811 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000
- Environ 38% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1620 MHz versus 1170 MHz
- Environ 7% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1815 MHz versus 1695 MHz
- Environ 15% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 200 Watt versus 230 Watt
- 7x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 14000 MHz versus 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective)
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 1620 MHz versus 1170 MHz |
Vitesse augmenté | 1815 MHz versus 1695 MHz |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 200 Watt versus 230 Watt |
Vitesse de mémoire | 14000 MHz versus 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) |
Référence | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3719 versus 3714 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 versus 3355 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3719 versus 3714 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 versus 3355 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA RTX A5000
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000
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 A5000 | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 22961 | 16029 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 1039 | 751 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 154648 | 105171 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 581.432 | 226.447 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 6836.931 | 4161.764 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 54.372 | 25.476 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 191.518 | 118.544 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 2038.811 | 1106.12 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 22508 | 19811 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 | 3719 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 | 3358 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 22508 | 19811 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 | 3719 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 | 3358 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 10685 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA RTX A5000 | NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Ampere | Turing |
Nom de code | GA102 | TU104 |
Date de sortie | 12 Apr 2021 | 13 August 2018 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 65 | 153 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $2,299 | |
Genre | Workstation | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1695 MHz | 1815 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 1170 MHz | 1620 MHz |
Processus de fabrication | 8 nm | 12 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 867.8 GFLOPS (1:32) | |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 27.77 TFLOPS (1:1) | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 27.77 TFLOPS | |
Pipelines | 8192 | |
Pixel fill rate | 162.7 GPixel/s | |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 433.9 GTexel/s | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 230 Watt | 200 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 28300 million | 13,600 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | 4x DisplayPort | 3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Facteur de forme | Dual-slot | |
Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Longeur | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | 267 mm |
Énergie du systeme recommandé (PSU) | 550 Watt | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
Largeur | 112 mm (4.4 inches) | |
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 | 24 GB | |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 768 GB/s | |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 384 bit | |
Vitesse de mémoire | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) | 14000 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 |