NVIDIA Tesla P4 versus AMD Radeon R9 290
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Tesla P4 and AMD Radeon R9 290 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 Tesla P4
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 2 ans 10 mois plus tard
- Environ 12% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 170.1 GTexel / s versus 151.5 GTexel / s
- Environ 12% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 5,443 gflops versus 4,849 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 16 nm versus 28 nm
- 3.7x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 75 Watt versus 275 Watt
- 2x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 8 GB versus 4 GB
- Environ 20% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 6008 MHz versus 5000 MHz
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 8926 versus 8293
- Environ 65% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 147.62 versus 89.325
- Environ 31% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1791.761 versus 1366.314
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 99.574 versus 98.765
- Environ 81% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 11409 versus 6300
- Environ 81% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 11409 versus 6300
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 13 September 2016 versus 5 November 2013 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 170.1 GTexel / s versus 151.5 GTexel / s |
| Performance á point flottant | 5,443 gflops versus 4,849 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 16 nm versus 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt versus 275 Watt |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 8 GB versus 4 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 6008 MHz versus 5000 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 8926 versus 8293 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 147.62 versus 89.325 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1791.761 versus 1366.314 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 99.574 versus 98.765 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 11409 versus 6300 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 11409 versus 6300 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 290
- Environ 17% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 947 MHz versus 810 MHz
- Environ 96% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 775 versus 395
- 2.7x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 102277 versus 37758
- Environ 6% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 10.034 versus 9.457
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 540.645 versus 523.29
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 947 MHz versus 810 MHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 775 versus 395 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 102277 versus 37758 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 10.034 versus 9.457 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 540.645 versus 523.29 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3711 versus 3698 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3354 versus 3341 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3711 versus 3698 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3354 versus 3341 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Tesla P4
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 290
| 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 Tesla P4 | AMD Radeon R9 290 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 8926 | 8293 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 395 | 775 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 37758 | 102277 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 147.62 | 89.325 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1791.761 | 1366.314 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 9.457 | 10.034 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 99.574 | 98.765 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 523.29 | 540.645 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 11409 | 6300 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3698 | 3711 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3341 | 3354 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 11409 | 6300 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3698 | 3711 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3341 | 3354 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3683 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Tesla P4 | AMD Radeon R9 290 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | GCN 2.0 |
| Nom de code | GP104 | Hawaii |
| Date de sortie | 13 September 2016 | 5 November 2013 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 362 | 360 |
| Genre | Workstation | Desktop |
| Conception | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $399 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1063 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 810 MHz | 947 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 5,443 gflops | 4,849 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 16 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 2560 | 2560 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 170.1 GTexel / s | 151.5 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 275 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 7,200 million | 6,200 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 267 mm | 275 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 8 GB | 4 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 192.3 GB / s | 320.0 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 256 Bit | 512 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 6008 MHz | 5000 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
| HD3D | ||
| LiquidVR | ||
| TressFX | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA Tesla P4 avec des autres
NVIDIATesla P4 vs
ATIFireGL V8600
NVIDIATesla P4 vs
AMDRadeon R9 290
NVIDIATesla P4 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 980
NVIDIATesla P4 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 970
NVIDIATesla P4 vs
NVIDIATesla M6
NVIDIATesla P4 vs
IntelArc A370M
