AMD FirePro W2100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 625M
Comparative analysis of AMD FirePro W2100 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 625M 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 1 year(s) 10 month(s) later
- 3.3x more pipelines: 320 vs 96
- Around 81% better floating-point performance: 435.2 gflops vs 240.0 gflops
- Around 79% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 859 vs 479
- 2.2x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 315 vs 141
- Around 67% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 3723 vs 2229
- Around 50% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1494 vs 999
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3346 vs 3257
- Around 50% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1494 vs 999
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3346 vs 3257
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 12 August 2014 vs 1 October 2012 |
Pipelines | 320 vs 96 |
Floating-point performance | 435.2 gflops vs 240.0 gflops |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 859 vs 479 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 315 vs 141 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3723 vs 2229 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1494 vs 999 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3346 vs 3257 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1494 vs 999 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3346 vs 3257 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GT 625M
- 26.7x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 400 Watt
Specifications (specs) | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 400 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2333 vs 2329 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2333 vs 2329 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD FirePro W2100
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 625M
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
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) |
|
|
Name | AMD FirePro W2100 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 625M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 859 | 479 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 315 | 141 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3723 | 2229 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 10.438 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 289.646 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.991 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 19.794 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 50.338 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1494 | 999 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2329 | 2333 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3346 | 3257 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1494 | 999 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2329 | 2333 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3346 | 3257 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1058 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD FirePro W2100 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 625M | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Fermi 2.0 |
Code name | Oland | GF117 |
Launch date | 12 August 2014 | 1 October 2012 |
Place in performance rating | 1210 | 1213 |
Type | Workstation | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 680 MHz | |
Core clock speed | 630 MHz | |
Floating-point performance | 435.2 gflops | 240.0 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 320 | 96 |
Texture fill rate | 13.6 GTexel / s | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 400 Watt | 15 Watt |
Transistor count | 1,040 million | 585 million |
CUDA cores | 96 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 2x DisplayPort | No outputs |
DisplayPort count | 2 | |
Dual-link DVI support | ||
HDCP | ||
HDMI | ||
Maximum VGA resolution | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | PCI Express 2.0 |
Form factor | Low Profile / Half Length | |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Supplementary power connectors | None | |
Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12 API |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 2 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 28.8 GB / s | |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | 1800 MHz |
Memory type | n / a | DDR3 |
Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
AppAcceleration | ||
Powerplay | ||
3D Blu-Ray | ||
CUDA | ||
DirectCompute | ||
DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 | |
Optimus |