Radeon 660M vs FirePro A300

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated329
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data28.19
ArchitectureTeraScale 3 (2010−2013)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameTrinity GLRembrandt+
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date6 June 2012 (12 years ago)3 January 2023 (1 year ago)

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores384384
Core clock speed760 MHz1500 MHz
Boost clock speed905 MHz1900 MHz
Number of transistors1,303 million13,100 million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt40 Watt
Texture fill rate21.7245.60
Floating-point processing power0.695 TFLOPS1.459 TFLOPS
ROPs816
TMUs2424
Ray Tracing Coresno data6

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
WidthIGPIGP
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeSystem SharedSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory bus widthSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory clock speedSystem SharedSystem Shared
Shared memoryno data-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.06.7
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.22.0
VulkanN/A1.3

Pros & cons summary


Recency 6 June 2012 3 January 2023
Chip lithography 32 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 40 Watt

Radeon 660M has an age advantage of 10 years, a 433.3% more advanced lithography process, and 62.5% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between FirePro A300 and Radeon 660M. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that FirePro A300 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon 660M is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD FirePro A300
FirePro A300
AMD Radeon 660M
Radeon 660M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


5 1 vote

Rate FirePro A300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 305 votes

Rate Radeon 660M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.