Intel HD Graphics 615 vs AMD FirePro M2000

Comparative analysis of Intel HD Graphics 615 and AMD FirePro M2000 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 Intel HD Graphics 615

• Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 1 month(s) later
• 2.1x more texture fill rate: 25.2 GTexel / s vs 12 GTexel / s
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 40 nm
• 6.6x lower typical power consumption: 5 Watt vs 33 Watt
• 16x more maximum memory size: 16 GB vs 1 GB
• Around 66% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 705 vs 425
• 2.6x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 3050 vs 1168
• 3.8x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 12.486 vs 3.284
• Around 10% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 215.572 vs 195.801
• 4x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.238 vs 0.31
• Around 9% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 11.311 vs 10.402
• 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1128 vs 544
• Around 41% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2409 vs 1709
• 2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1128 vs 544
• Around 41% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2409 vs 1709

Reasons to consider the AMD FirePro M2000

• Around 67% higher core clock speed: 500 MHz vs 300 MHz
• 20x more pipelines: 480 vs 24
• Around 19% better floating-point performance: 480.0 gflops vs 403.2 gflops
• Around 11% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 206 vs 186
• 2.4x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 44.254 vs 18.292
• Around 33% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1498 vs 1128
• Around 33% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1498 vs 1128

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics 615
GPU 2: AMD FirePro M2000

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	705 425
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	186 206
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	3050 1168
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	12.486 3.284
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	215.572 195.801
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1.238 0.31
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	11.311 10.402
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	18.292 44.254
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1128 544
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1128 1498
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2409 1709
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1128 544
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1128 1498
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2409 1709

Compare specifications (specs)