Home GPU Comparison NVIDIA Quadro 400 vs Intel Arctic Sound 2T

NVIDIA Quadro 400 vs Intel Arctic Sound 2T

We compared two Professional market GPUs: 512MB VRAM Quadro 400 and 16GB VRAM Arctic Sound 2T to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.

Main Differences

NVIDIA Quadro 400 's Advantages
Lower TDP (32W vs 500W)
Intel Arctic Sound 2T 's Advantages
Released 9 years and 9 months late
More VRAM (16GB vs 512GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (1229GB/s vs 12.32GB/s)
7632 additional rendering cores

Score

Benchmark

FP32 (float)
Quadro 400
0.108 TFLOPS
Arctic Sound 2T +12696%
13.82 TFLOPS
VS

Graphics Card

Apr 2011
Release Date
Jan 2021
Quadro
Generation
Xe Graphics
Professional
Type
Professional
PCIe 2.0 x16
Bus Interface
PCIe 4.0 x16

Clock Speeds

-
-
-
-
-
-
770 MHz
Memory Clock
1200 MHz

Memory

512MB
Memory Size
16GB
DDR3
Memory Type
HBM2e
64bit
Memory Bus
4096bit
12.32GB/s
Bandwidth
1229GB/s

Render Config

-
-
-
6
SM Count
-
48
Shading Units
7680
16
TMUs
240
8
ROPs
120
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
32 KB
L2 Cache
8 MB
-
-
-

Theoretical Performance

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

Board Design

32W
TDP
500W
200 W
Suggested PSU
900 W
1x DVI 1x DisplayPort
Outputs
No outputs
None
Power Connectors
None

Graphics Processor

GT216
GPU Name
Arctic Sound
GT216 GL
GPU Variant
-
Tesla 2.0
Architecture
Generation 12.5
TSMC
Foundry
Intel
40 nm
Process Size
10 nm
0.486 billion
Transistors
8 billion
100 mm²
Die Size
190 mm²

Graphics Features

11.1 (10_1)
DirectX
12 (12_1)
3.3
OpenGL
4.6
1.1
OpenCL
3.0
N/A
Vulkan
N/A
1.2
CUDA
-
4.1
Shader Model
6.5

Related GPU Comparisons

Related News

© 2024 - TopCPU.net   Contact Us Privacy Policy