NVIDIA Tesla P40 versus AMD Radeon R9 370X
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Tesla P40 and AMD Radeon R9 370X 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 Tesla P40
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 0 mois plus tard
- Environ 33% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1303 MHz versus 980 MHz
- Environ 49% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1531 MHz versus 1030 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 367.4 GTexel / s versus 82.4 GTexel / s
- 3x plus de pipelines: 3840 versus 1280
- 4.5x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 11,758 gflops versus 2,637 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 16 nm versus 28 nm
- 12x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 24 GB versus 2 GB
- Environ 79% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 10008 MHz versus 5600 MHz
- 2.4x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 62287 versus 25659
- 4.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 300.355 versus 65.071
- 3.1x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 3559.383 versus 1139.703
- 3.7x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 19.757 versus 5.39
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 204.32 versus 88.44
- 3.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 1214.142 versus 337.583
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 9538 versus 8393
- Environ 14% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 9538 versus 8393
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 13 September 2016 versus 27 August 2015 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1303 MHz versus 980 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1531 MHz versus 1030 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 367.4 GTexel / s versus 82.4 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 3840 versus 1280 |
| Performance á point flottant | 11,758 gflops versus 2,637 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 16 nm versus 28 nm |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 24 GB versus 2 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 10008 MHz versus 5600 MHz |
| Référence | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 62287 versus 25659 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 300.355 versus 65.071 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3559.383 versus 1139.703 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 19.757 versus 5.39 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 204.32 versus 88.44 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1214.142 versus 337.583 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9538 versus 8393 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9538 versus 8393 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 370X
- Environ 39% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 180 Watt versus 250 Watt
| Caractéristiques | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 180 Watt versus 250 Watt |
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3704 versus 3699 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3348 versus 3340 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3704 versus 3699 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3348 versus 3340 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Tesla P40
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 370X
| 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 P40 | AMD Radeon R9 370X |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 12267 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 439 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 62287 | 25659 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 300.355 | 65.071 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3559.383 | 1139.703 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 19.757 | 5.39 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 204.32 | 88.44 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1214.142 | 337.583 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9538 | 8393 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3699 | 3704 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3340 | 3348 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9538 | 8393 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3699 | 3704 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3340 | 3348 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Tesla P40 | AMD Radeon R9 370X | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | GCN 1.0 |
| Nom de code | GP102 | Trinidad |
| Date de sortie | 13 September 2016 | 27 August 2015 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $5,699 | $199 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 234 | 526 |
| Genre | Workstation | Desktop |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1531 MHz | 1030 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1303 MHz | 980 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 11,758 gflops | 2,637 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 16 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 3840 | 1280 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 367.4 GTexel / s | 82.4 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 250 Watt | 180 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 11,800 million | 2,800 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 267 mm | 221 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | 2x 6-pin |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 24 GB | 2 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 480.4 GB / s | 179.2 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 384 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 10008 MHz | 5600 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5X | GDDR5 |
