NVIDIA Tesla P40 versus NVIDIA Quadro M4000M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Tesla P40 and NVIDIA Quadro M4000M 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 P40
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 0 mois plus tard
- Environ 34% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1303 MHz versus 975 MHz
- Environ 51% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1531 MHz versus 1013 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 367.4 GTexel / s versus 78 GTexel / s
- 3x plus de pipelines: 3840 versus 1,280
- 4.7x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 11,758 gflops versus 2,496 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 16 nm versus 28 nm
- 6x plus de taille maximale de mémoire : 24 GB versus 4 GB
- 2x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 10008 MHz versus 5012 MHz
- 2x meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 12678 versus 6186
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 450 versus 417
- 2.8x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 53716 versus 19212
- 3.7x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 300.355 versus 81.104
- 2.9x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 3559.383 versus 1235.338
- 3.2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 19.757 versus 6.157
- 3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 204.32 versus 68.443
- 4.8x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 1214.142 versus 251.464
- Environ 25% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 9538 versus 7602
- Environ 35% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3699 versus 2749
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3340 versus 3093
- Environ 25% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 9538 versus 7602
- Environ 35% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3699 versus 2749
- Environ 8% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3340 versus 3093
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 13 September 2016 versus 18 August 2015 |
Vitesse du noyau | 1303 MHz versus 975 MHz |
Vitesse augmenté | 1531 MHz versus 1013 MHz |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 367.4 GTexel / s versus 78 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 3840 versus 1,280 |
Performance á point flottant | 11,758 gflops versus 2,496 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 16 nm versus 28 nm |
Taille de mémore maximale | 24 GB versus 4 GB |
Vitesse de mémoire | 10008 MHz versus 5012 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 12678 versus 6186 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 450 versus 417 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 53716 versus 19212 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 300.355 versus 81.104 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3559.383 versus 1235.338 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 19.757 versus 6.157 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 204.32 versus 68.443 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1214.142 versus 251.464 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9538 versus 7602 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3699 versus 2749 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3340 versus 3093 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9538 versus 7602 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3699 versus 2749 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3340 versus 3093 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro M4000M
- 2.5x consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 100 Watt versus 250 Watt
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt versus 250 Watt |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Tesla P40
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro M4000M
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 P40 | NVIDIA Quadro M4000M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 12678 | 6186 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 450 | 417 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 53716 | 19212 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 300.355 | 81.104 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 3559.383 | 1235.338 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 19.757 | 6.157 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 204.32 | 68.443 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1214.142 | 251.464 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9538 | 7602 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3699 | 2749 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3340 | 3093 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9538 | 7602 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3699 | 2749 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3340 | 3093 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA Tesla P40 | NVIDIA Quadro M4000M | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Pascal | Maxwell 2.0 |
Nom de code | GP102 | GM204 |
Date de sortie | 13 September 2016 | 18 August 2015 |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $5,699 | |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 229 | 552 |
Genre | Workstation | Mobile workstation |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 1531 MHz | 1013 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 1303 MHz | 975 MHz |
Performance á point flottant | 11,758 gflops | 2,496 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 16 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 3840 | 1,280 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 367.4 GTexel / s | 78 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 250 Watt | 100 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 11,800 million | 5,200 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
Display Port | 1.2 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Longeur | 267 mm | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | None |
Taille du laptop | large | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Shader Model | 5.0 | |
Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 24 GB | 4 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 480.4 GB / s | 160 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 384 Bit | 256 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 10008 MHz | 5012 MHz |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5X | GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision Pro | ||
Mosaic | ||
nView Display Management | ||
Optimus |