NVIDIA T400 versus AMD Radeon Vega 11
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA T400 and AMD Radeon Vega 11 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: 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), PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA T400
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 3 ans 2 mois plus tard
- Environ 40% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 420 MHz versus 300 MHz
- Environ 10% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1425 MHz versus 1300 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 34.20 GTexel/s versus 57.2 GTexel / s
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 12 nm versus 14 nm
- Environ 17% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 30 Watt versus 35 Watt
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 16960 versus 13175
- Environ 41% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 58.805 versus 41.582
- 2.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 785.059 versus 371.843
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.961 versus 3.156
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 53.111 versus 52.449
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5088 versus 2156
- 2.4x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5088 versus 2156
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 6 May 2021 versus 13 February 2018 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 420 MHz versus 300 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1425 MHz versus 1300 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 34.20 GTexel/s versus 57.2 GTexel / s |
| Processus de fabrication | 12 nm versus 14 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt versus 35 Watt |
| Référence | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 16960 versus 13175 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 58.805 versus 41.582 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 785.059 versus 371.843 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.961 versus 3.156 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 53.111 versus 52.449 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5088 versus 2156 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3346 versus 3343 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5088 versus 2156 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3346 versus 3343 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon Vega 11
- Environ 83% de pipelines plus haut: 704 versus 384
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 248.838 versus 222.15
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2475 versus 2173
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2475 versus 2173
| Caractéristiques | |
| Pipelines | 704 versus 384 |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 248.838 versus 222.15 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2475 versus 2173 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2475 versus 2173 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA T400
GPU 2: AMD Radeon Vega 11
| 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 T400 | AMD Radeon Vega 11 |
|---|---|---|
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 16960 | 13175 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 58.805 | 41.582 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 785.059 | 371.843 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.961 | 3.156 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 53.111 | 52.449 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 222.15 | 248.838 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5088 | 2156 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2173 | 2475 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3346 | 3343 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5088 | 2156 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2173 | 2475 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3346 | 3343 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1843 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 488 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA T400 | AMD Radeon Vega 11 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Turing | GCN 5.0 |
| Nom de code | TU117 | Owl |
| Date de sortie | 6 May 2021 | 13 February 2018 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 901 | 903 |
| Genre | Desktop | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1425 MHz | 1300 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 420 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Processus de fabrication | 12 nm | 14 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 34.20 GFLOPS (1:32) | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 2.189 TFLOPS (2:1) | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 1,094 GFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 384 | 704 |
| Pixel fill rate | 22.80 GPixel/s | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 34.20 GTexel/s | 57.2 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt | 35 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 4700 million | 4,940 million |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,830 gflops | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 3x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a | No outputs |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Facteur de forme | Single-slot | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | IGP |
| Énergie du systeme recommandé (PSU) | 200 Watt | |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | |
| Shader Model | 6.7 (6.4) | |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 80.00 GB/s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 64 bit | |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 1250 MHz, 10 Gbps effective | |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR6 | System Shared |
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA T400 avec des autres
NVIDIAT400 vs
NVIDIAGeForce PCX 5300
NVIDIAT400 vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 2600 XT
NVIDIAT400 vs
ATIRadeon HD 4200
NVIDIAT400 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 860M
NVIDIAT400 vs
AMDRadeon Vega 11
NVIDIAT400 vs
NVIDIAGeForce MX250
