AMD FirePro W2100 vs AMD FirePro V4900

Comparative analysis of AMD FirePro W2100 and AMD FirePro V4900 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD FirePro W2100

• Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 9 month(s) later
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• 2x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1 GB
• Around 95% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 3750 vs 1927
• Around 66% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 10.438 vs 6.303
• Around 66% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.991 vs 0.597
• Around 11% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 19.794 vs 17.874

Reasons to consider the AMD FirePro V4900

• Around 27% higher core clock speed: 800 MHz vs 630 MHz
• Around 41% higher texture fill rate: 19.2 GTexel / s vs 13.6 GTexel / s
• Around 50% higher pipelines: 480 vs 320
• Around 76% better floating-point performance: 768.0 gflops vs 435.2 gflops
• 5.3x lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 400 Watt
• 2.2x more memory clock speed: 4000 MHz vs 1800 MHz
• Around 18% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1006 vs 856
• Around 2% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 320 vs 314
• Around 35% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 392.237 vs 289.646
• Around 45% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 72.818 vs 50.338
• Around 17% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1747 vs 1494
• Around 61% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3753 vs 2329
• 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 7745 vs 3346
• Around 17% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1747 vs 1494
• Around 61% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3753 vs 2329
• 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 7745 vs 3346

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD FirePro W2100
GPU 2: AMD FirePro V4900

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	856 1006
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	314 320
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	3750 1927
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	10.438 6.303
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	289.646 392.237
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	0.991 0.597
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	19.794 17.874
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	50.338 72.818
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1494 1747
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2329 3753
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3346 7745
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1494 1747
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2329 3753
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3346 7745

Compare specifications (specs)