AMD FirePro M8900 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260

Comparative analysis of AMD FirePro M8900 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 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: 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), PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).

AMD FirePro M8900

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD FirePro M8900

Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 9 month(s) later
5x more pipelines: 960 vs 192
2.7x better floating-point performance: 1,305.6 gflops vs 476.9 gflops
A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 40 nm vs 65 nm
2.4x lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 182 Watt
2.3x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 896 MB
3.6x more memory clock speed: 3600 MHz vs 999 MHz
Around 22% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 10.529 vs 8.664
Around 59% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 760.858 vs 477.327
Around 5% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 26.149 vs 24.906
3.7x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 108.525 vs 29.525

Specifications (specs)
Launch date	12 April 2011 vs 16 June 2008
Pipelines	960 vs 192
Floating-point performance	1,305.6 gflops vs 476.9 gflops
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm vs 65 nm
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	75 Watt vs 182 Watt
Maximum memory size	2 GB vs 896 MB
Memory clock speed	3600 MHz vs 999 MHz
Benchmarks
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	10.529 vs 8.664
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	760.858 vs 477.327
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	26.149 vs 24.906
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	108.525 vs 29.525

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260

Around 83% higher core clock speed: 1242 MHz vs 680 MHz
Around 13% higher texture fill rate: 36.9 billion / sec vs 32.6 GTexel / s
Around 4% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 19512 vs 18738

Specifications (specs)
Core clock speed	1242 MHz vs 680 MHz
Texture fill rate	36.9 billion / sec vs 32.6 GTexel / s
Benchmarks
Geekbench - OpenCL	19512 vs 18738

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD FirePro M8900
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260

Geekbench - OpenCL

GPU 1

GPU 2

18738

19512

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

10.529

8.664

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

760.858

477.327

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

26.149

24.906

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

108.525

29.525

Name	AMD FirePro M8900	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260
Geekbench - OpenCL	18738	19512
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	10.529	8.664
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	760.858	477.327
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	1.158
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	26.149	24.906
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	108.525	29.525
PassMark - G3D Mark		1217
PassMark - G2D Mark		54
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)		3342
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)		3342

Compare specifications (specs)

	AMD FirePro M8900	NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260
Essentials
Architecture	TeraScale 2	Tesla 2.0
Code name	Blackcomb	GT200
Launch date	12 April 2011	16 June 2008
Place in performance rating	1405	1407
Type	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Launch price (MSRP)		$449
Price now		$95.38
Value for money (0-100)		13.70
Technical info
Core clock speed	680 MHz	1242 MHz
Floating-point performance	1,305.6 gflops	476.9 gflops
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	65 nm
Pipelines	960	192
Texture fill rate	32.6 GTexel / s	36.9 billion / sec
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	75 Watt	182 Watt
Transistor count	1,700 million	1,400 million
CUDA cores		192
Maximum GPU temperature		105 °C
Video outputs and ports
Display Connectors	No outputs	2x DVI, 1x S-Video, Dual Link DVIHDTV
Audio input for HDMI		S / PDIF
HDMI
Maximum VGA resolution		2048x1536
Multi monitor support
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements
Bus support	n / a
Form factor	MXM-B
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 2.0 x16
Laptop size	large
Supplementary power connectors	None	2x 6-pin
Height		4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)
Length		10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm)
SLI options		2-way3-way
API support
DirectX	11.2 (11_0)	10.0
OpenGL	4.4	2.1
Memory
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	896 MB
Memory bandwidth	115 GB / s	111.9 GB / s
Memory bus width	256 Bit	448 Bit
Memory clock speed	3600 MHz	999 MHz
Memory type	GDDR5	GDDR3
Shared memory	0
Technologies
3D Vision
CUDA
SLI