FirePro M6000 vs Radeon HD 6990

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 6990 with FirePro M6000, including specs and performance data.

HD 6990
2011, $699
2 GB GDDR5, 375 Watt
7.48
+71.2%

HD 6990 outperforms M6000 by an impressive 71% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking591724
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.60no data
Power efficiency1.547.86
ArchitectureTeraScale 3 (2010−2013)GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code nameAntillesHeathrow
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date8 March 2011 (15 years ago)1 July 2012 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$699 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1536 ×2640
Core clock speed830 MHz800 MHz
Number of transistors2,640 million1,500 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)375 Watt43 Watt
Texture fill rate79.68 ×232.00
Floating-point processing power2.55 TFLOPS ×21.024 TFLOPS
ROPs32 ×216
TMUs96 ×240
L1 Cache384 KB160 KB
L2 Cache512 KB256 KB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
Bus supportno datan/a
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Length295 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Form factorno dataMXM-B
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pinNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB ×22 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit ×2128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth160.0 GB/s ×272 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 4x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs
StereoOutput3D-+

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 (11_1)
Shader Model5.05.1
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.21.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

HD 6990 7.48
+71.2%
FirePro M6000 4.37

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

HD 6990 3118
+71.3%
Samples: 17
FirePro M6000 1820
Samples: 1

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

900p95−100
+63.8%
58
−63.8%
Full HD70−75
+66.7%
42
−66.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p9.99no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Palworld 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Palworld 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Palworld 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Palworld 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Palworld 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how HD 6990 and FirePro M6000 compete in popular games:

  • HD 6990 is 64% faster in 900p
  • HD 6990 is 67% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 59 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.48 4.37
Recency 8 March 2011 1 July 2012
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 375 Watt 43 Watt

HD 6990 has a 71% higher aggregate performance score.

FirePro M6000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 43% more advanced lithography process, and 772% lower power consumption.

The Radeon HD 6990 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro M6000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 6990 is a desktop graphics card while FirePro M6000 is a mobile workstation one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.6 31 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6990 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 15 votes

Rate FirePro M6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon HD 6990 or FirePro M6000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.