NVIDIA Quadro M2000 vs AMD FirePro W5100

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro M2000 and AMD FirePro W5100 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 NVIDIA Quadro M2000

• Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 0 month(s) later
• Around 27% higher texture fill rate: 56.64 GTexel / s vs 44.64 GTexel / s
• Around 27% better floating-point performance: 1,812 gflops vs 1,428 gflops
• Around 10% higher memory clock speed: 6612 MHz vs 6000 MHz
• Around 34% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 4000 vs 2978
• Around 6% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 565 vs 531
• Around 24% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 14591 vs 11724
• Around 57% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 55.048 vs 35.15
• Around 16% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.697 vs 3.199
• Around 38% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 225.868 vs 163.258
• Around 26% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5523 vs 4397
• Around 26% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5523 vs 4397

Reasons to consider the AMD FirePro W5100

• Around 17% higher core clock speed: 930 MHz vs 796 MHz
• Around 50% lower typical power consumption: 50 Watt vs 75 Watt
• Around 31% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 838.518 vs 639.056
• Around 60% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 57.354 vs 35.796
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3356 vs 3325
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3356 vs 3325

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M2000
GPU 2: AMD FirePro W5100

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	4000 2978
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	565 531
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	14591 11724
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	55.048 35.15
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	639.056 838.518
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3.697 3.199
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	35.796 57.354
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	225.868 163.258
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	5523 4397
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3684 3688
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3325 3356
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	5523 4397
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3684 3688
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3325 3356

Compare specifications (specs)