NVIDIA Quadro M2000M vs AMD FirePro W5100

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro M2000M 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 M2000M

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 8 month(s) later
• Around 11% higher core clock speed: 1029 MHz vs 930 MHz
• Around 16% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3467 vs 2986
• Around 35% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 47.281 vs 35.15
• Around 9% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.5 vs 3.199
• Around 5% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 171.268 vs 163.258
• Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4920 vs 4397
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3715 vs 3688
• Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4920 vs 4397
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3715 vs 3688

Reasons to consider the AMD FirePro W5100

• Around 2% higher texture fill rate: 44.64 GTexel / s vs 43.92 GTexel / s
• Around 20% higher pipelines: 768 vs 640
• Around 2% better floating-point performance: 1,428 gflops vs 1,405 gflops
• Around 10% lower typical power consumption: 50 Watt vs 55 Watt
• Around 20% higher memory clock speed: 6000 MHz vs 5012 MHz
• Around 60% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 543 vs 340
• Around 49% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 12176 vs 8148
• Around 7% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 838.518 vs 782.113
• Around 12% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 57.354 vs 51.048

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M2000M
GPU 2: AMD FirePro W5100

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	3467 2986
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	340 543
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	8148 12176
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	47.281 35.15
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	782.113 838.518
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3.5 3.199
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	51.048 57.354
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	171.268 163.258
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4920 4397
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3715 3688
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3355 3356
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4920 4397
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3715 3688
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3355 3356

Compare specifications (specs)