要把ATi4670賣掉改買AMD6670嗎? - 顯卡

By Hedda
at 2011-05-22T17:50
at 2011-05-22T17:50
Table of Contents
※ 引述《seyasens ((黑心菜單推廣委員會))》之銘言:
: 推 pipi5867:加幾百塊 換5770吧 效能更是天差地別 05/22 14:46
效能不至於天差地別吧?
拿5770 hawk 來比,MSI 6670的 82xx跟同廠的hawk vantage 101xx 比起來,
差了大概18%左右,其實不算太大。
但功耗方面:
6670 待機82w,滿載148w
5770 待機93w,滿載207w
6670滿載功耗比5770低了28%。
而且熱功耗(TDP) 108w vs 66w,低了將近40%,更涼爽。
鐵架屋賣hawk一塊含稅3990,6670含稅才3190,5770比6670售價高了25%。
這樣看來我會選擇6670,以CP值跟表現/功耗比來說都是樂勝5770。
--
╭────────╮
│請問您為什麼 │ ╴ ╴ ╭───╮
│下定決心拋棄微軟 > εˋ▃ρ ξ─ 3 < 我窮。│
│擁抱自由軟體呢?│ 妓﹀∕  ̄﹀M ╰───╯
╰────────╯ 》 ║ Designed by Matsuzaki
--
: 推 pipi5867:加幾百塊 換5770吧 效能更是天差地別 05/22 14:46
效能不至於天差地別吧?
拿5770 hawk 來比,MSI 6670的 82xx跟同廠的hawk vantage 101xx 比起來,
差了大概18%左右,其實不算太大。
但功耗方面:
6670 待機82w,滿載148w
5770 待機93w,滿載207w
6670滿載功耗比5770低了28%。
而且熱功耗(TDP) 108w vs 66w,低了將近40%,更涼爽。
鐵架屋賣hawk一塊含稅3990,6670含稅才3190,5770比6670售價高了25%。
這樣看來我會選擇6670,以CP值跟表現/功耗比來說都是樂勝5770。
--
╭────────╮
│請問您為什麼 │ ╴ ╴ ╭───╮
│下定決心拋棄微軟 > εˋ▃ρ ξ─ 3 < 我窮。│
│擁抱自由軟體呢?│ 妓﹀∕  ̄﹀M ╰───╯
╰────────╯ 》 ║ Designed by Matsuzaki
--
Tags:
顯卡
All Comments

By Hazel
at 2011-05-23T06:58
at 2011-05-23T06:58

By Valerie
at 2011-05-24T17:21
at 2011-05-24T17:21

By Enid
at 2011-05-29T15:29
at 2011-05-29T15:29

By Kristin
at 2011-05-31T21:12
at 2011-05-31T21:12

By Jessica
at 2011-06-03T02:08
at 2011-06-03T02:08

By Connor
at 2011-06-04T16:23
at 2011-06-04T16:23

By Kumar
at 2011-06-07T23:55
at 2011-06-07T23:55

By Donna
at 2011-06-11T07:27
at 2011-06-11T07:27

By Emma
at 2011-06-12T00:55
at 2011-06-12T00:55

By Quanna
at 2011-06-15T10:33
at 2011-06-15T10:33

By Aaliyah
at 2011-06-17T10:39
at 2011-06-17T10:39

By Ida
at 2011-06-17T20:30
at 2011-06-17T20:30

By Isabella
at 2011-06-22T09:57
at 2011-06-22T09:57

By Zanna
at 2011-06-25T02:35
at 2011-06-25T02:35
Related Posts
ATi顯卡Overscan的問題

By Elizabeth
at 2011-05-22T17:47
at 2011-05-22T17:47
舊電腦想升級顯卡

By Todd Johnson
at 2011-05-22T17:39
at 2011-05-22T17:39
請教電腦問題

By Enid
at 2011-05-22T15:48
at 2011-05-22T15:48
最近想購入4850

By Dora
at 2011-05-22T14:59
at 2011-05-22T14:59
無法安裝新的驅動程式

By Leila
at 2011-05-22T10:23
at 2011-05-22T10:23