Home GPU Comparison NVIDIA Quadro FX 1600M vs Intel Arctic Sound 2T

NVIDIA Quadro FX 1600M vs Intel Arctic Sound 2T

We compared two Professional market GPUs: 512MB VRAM Quadro FX 1600M 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 FX 1600M 's Advantages
Lower TDP (50W vs 500W)
Intel Arctic Sound 2T 's Advantages
Released 13 years and 7 months late
More VRAM (16GB vs 512GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (1229GB/s vs 25.60GB/s)
7648 additional rendering cores

Score

Benchmark

FP32 (float)
Quadro FX 1600M
0.08 TFLOPS
Arctic Sound 2T +17175%
13.82 TFLOPS
VS

Graphics Card

Jun 2007
Release Date
Jan 2021
Quadro FX Mobile
Generation
Xe Graphics
Professional
Type
Professional
MXM-HE
Bus Interface
PCIe 4.0 x16

Clock Speeds

-
-
-
-
-
-
800 MHz
Memory Clock
1200 MHz

Memory

512MB
Memory Size
16GB
GDDR3
Memory Type
HBM2e
128bit
Memory Bus
4096bit
25.60GB/s
Bandwidth
1229GB/s

Render Config

-
-
-
4
SM Count
-
32
Shading Units
7680
16
TMUs
240
8
ROPs
120
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
32 KB
L2 Cache
8 MB
-
-
-

Theoretical Performance

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

Board Design

50W
TDP
500W
-
Suggested PSU
900 W
No outputs
Outputs
No outputs
-
Power Connectors
None

Graphics Processor

G84
GPU Name
Arctic Sound
NB8P-GLM
GPU Variant
-
Tesla
Architecture
Generation 12.5
TSMC
Foundry
Intel
80 nm
Process Size
10 nm
0.289 billion
Transistors
8 billion
169 mm²
Die Size
190 mm²

Graphics Features

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

Related GPU Comparisons

Related News

© 2024 - TopCPU.net   Contact Us Privacy Policy