Home GPU Comparison Intel Arctic Sound 2T vs NVIDIA Quadro FX 3600M

Intel Arctic Sound 2T vs NVIDIA Quadro FX 3600M

We compared two Professional market GPUs: 16GB VRAM Arctic Sound 2T and 512MB VRAM Quadro FX 3600M to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.

Main Differences

Intel Arctic Sound 2T 's Advantages
Released 12 years and 11 months late
More VRAM (16GB vs 512GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (1229GB/s vs 51.14GB/s)
7616 additional rendering cores
NVIDIA Quadro FX 3600M 's Advantages
Lower TDP (70W vs 500W)

Score

Benchmark

FP32 (float)
Arctic Sound 2T +8537%
13.82 TFLOPS
Quadro FX 3600M
0.16 TFLOPS
VS

Graphics Card

Jan 2021
Release Date
Feb 2008
Xe Graphics
Generation
Quadro FX Mobile
Professional
Type
Professional
PCIe 4.0 x16
Bus Interface
MXM-HE

Clock Speeds

-
-
-
-
-
-
1200 MHz
Memory Clock
799 MHz

Memory

16GB
Memory Size
512MB
HBM2e
Memory Type
GDDR3
4096bit
Memory Bus
256bit
1229GB/s
Bandwidth
51.14GB/s

Render Config

-
-
-
-
SM Count
8
7680
Shading Units
64
240
TMUs
32
120
ROPs
16
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
8 MB
L2 Cache
64 KB
-
-
-

Theoretical Performance

108.0 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
8.000 GPixel/s
216.0 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
16.00 GTexel/s
27.65 TFLOPS
FP16 (half)
-
13.82 TFLOPS
FP32 (float)
160.0 GFLOPS
3.456 TFLOPS
FP64 (double)
-

Board Design

500W
TDP
70W
900 W
Suggested PSU
-
No outputs
Outputs
No outputs
None
Power Connectors
-

Graphics Processor

Arctic Sound
GPU Name
G92
-
GPU Variant
NB8E-GLM3
Generation 12.5
Architecture
Tesla
Intel
Foundry
TSMC
10 nm
Process Size
65 nm
8 billion
Transistors
0.754 billion
190 mm²
Die Size
324 mm²

Graphics Features

12 (12_1)
DirectX
11.1 (10_0)
4.6
OpenGL
3.3
3.0
OpenCL
1.1
N/A
Vulkan
N/A
-
CUDA
1.1
6.5
Shader Model
4.0

Related GPU Comparisons

Related News

© 2024 - TopCPU.net   Contact Us Privacy Policy