AMD FirePro M4000 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M

Comparative analysis of AMD FirePro M4000 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, 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).

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD FirePro M4000

• Videocard is newer: launch date 3 month(s) later
• Around 9% higher core clock speed: 675 MHz vs 620 MHz
• Around 33% higher pipelines: 512 vs 384
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• 3x lower typical power consumption: 33 Watt vs 100 Watt
• 2.7x more memory clock speed: 4000 MHz vs 1500 MHz
• Around 32% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 412 vs 313
• Around 34% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 79.304 vs 59.007

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M

• Around 84% higher texture fill rate: 39.7 billion / sec vs 21.6 GTexel / s
• Around 38% better floating-point performance: 952.3 gflops vs 691.2 gflops
• 2x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1 GB
• Around 20% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1929 vs 1604
• Around 16% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 6362 vs 5490
• Around 41% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 22.12 vs 15.659
• Around 57% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 664.78 vs 424.37
• Around 20% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.003 vs 1.67
• Around 13% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 33.983 vs 30.072
• Around 21% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2649 vs 2189
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3690 vs 3539
• Around 21% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2649 vs 2189
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3690 vs 3539

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD FirePro M4000
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	1604 1929
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	412 313
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	5490 6362
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	15.659 22.12
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	424.37 664.78
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1.67 2.003
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	30.072 33.983
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	79.304 59.007
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2189 2649
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3539 3690
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3357 3347
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2189 2649
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3539 3690
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3357 3347

Compare specifications (specs)