NVIDIA Titan X Pascal versus NVIDIA Quadro M5000
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA Titan X Pascal and NVIDIA Quadro M5000 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: 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, PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Titan X Pascal
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 1 mois plus tard
- Environ 65% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1417 MHz versus 861 MHz
- Environ 47% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1531 MHz versus 1038 MHz
- times}x plus de taux de remplissage de la texture: 342.9 GTexel / s versus 132.9 GTexel / s
- Environ 75% de pipelines plus haut: 3584 versus 2048
- 2.6x de meilleur performance á point flottant: 10,974 gflops versus 4,252 gflops
- Un nouveau processus de fabrication soutient une carte vidéo plus forte, mais moins chaude: 16 nm versus 28 nm
- Environ 50% plus de taille maximale de mémoire: 12 GB versus 8 GB
- Environ 51% plus haut de vitesse de mémoire: 10008 MHz versus 6612 MHz
- 2.2x meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 63437 versus 28292
- Environ 67% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 165.792 versus 99.169
- 2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 2368.267 versus 1183.119
- 2.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 17.829 versus 7.899
- Environ 99% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 992.132 versus 498.551
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3696 versus 3677
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3696 versus 3677
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 2 August 2016 versus 29 June 2015 |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1417 MHz versus 861 MHz |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1531 MHz versus 1038 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 342.9 GTexel / s versus 132.9 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 3584 versus 2048 |
| Performance á point flottant | 10,974 gflops versus 4,252 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 16 nm versus 28 nm |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 12 GB versus 8 GB |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 10008 MHz versus 6612 MHz |
| Référence | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 63437 versus 28292 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 165.792 versus 99.169 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2368.267 versus 1183.119 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 17.829 versus 7.899 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 992.132 versus 498.551 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3696 versus 3677 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3333 versus 3324 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3696 versus 3677 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3333 versus 3324 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA Quadro M5000
- Environ 67% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 150 Watt versus 250 Watt
- 2.5x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 53.364 versus 21.354
- Environ 16% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 12524 versus 10841
- Environ 16% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 12524 versus 10841
| Caractéristiques | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 150 Watt versus 250 Watt |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 53.364 versus 21.354 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12524 versus 10841 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12524 versus 10841 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA Titan X Pascal
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro M5000
| 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 Titan X Pascal | NVIDIA Quadro M5000 |
|---|---|---|
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 63437 | 28292 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 165.792 | 99.169 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2368.267 | 1183.119 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 17.829 | 7.899 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 21.354 | 53.364 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 992.132 | 498.551 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10841 | 12524 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3696 | 3677 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3333 | 3324 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10841 | 12524 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3696 | 3677 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3333 | 3324 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 9557 | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 9396 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 660 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA Titan X Pascal | NVIDIA Quadro M5000 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Nom de code | GP102 | GM204 |
| Date de sortie | 2 August 2016 | 29 June 2015 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $1,199 | $2,856.99 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 346 | 342 |
| Genre | Desktop | Workstation |
| Prix maintenant | $1,498 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 7.47 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 1531 MHz | 1038 MHz |
| Vitesse du noyau | 1417 MHz | 861 MHz |
| Performance á point flottant | 10,974 gflops | 4,252 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 16 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 3584 | 2048 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 342.9 GTexel / s | 132.9 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 250 Watt | 150 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 11,800 million | 5,200 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort | DVI-I DP DP DP DP 3-pin Stereo, 1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort |
| Synchronization de plusieurs écrans | Quadro Sync | |
| Nombre d’écrans á la fois | 4 | |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 267 mm | 267 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | 1 x 6-pin |
| Options SLI | 1 | |
| Largeur | 2" (5.1 cm) | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Vulkan | ||
| Shader Model | 5 | |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 12 GB | 8 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 480.4 GB / s | |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 384 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 10008 MHz | 6612 MHz |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5X | 256 Bit |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| ECC (Error Correcting Code) | ||
| High-Performance Video I/O6 | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView Desktop Management | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA Titan X Pascal avec des autres
NVIDIATitan X Pascal vs
ATIAll-In-Wonder X1900
NVIDIATitan X Pascal vs
ATIRadeon HD 3850 X2
NVIDIATitan X Pascal vs
NVIDIAGeForce 9800S
NVIDIATitan X Pascal vs
AMDRadeon HD 6650A
NVIDIATitan X Pascal vs
AMDRadeon R9 290
NVIDIATitan X Pascal vs
AMDRadeon Pro 580X
