Radeon 680M vs FirePro D500

Place in the ranking	429	369
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	2.71	19.51
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	Tahiti	Rembrandt+
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	18 January 2014 (11 years ago)	3 January 2023 (2 years 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 cores	1536	768
Core clock speed	725 MHz	2000 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2200 MHz
Number of transistors	4,313 million	13,100 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	274 Watt	50 Watt
Texture fill rate	69.60	105.6
Floating-point processing power	2.227 TFLOPS	3.379 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	96	48
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	12

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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x8
Length	279 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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 type	GDDR5	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	System Shared
Memory bus width	384 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	1270 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	243.8 GB/s	no data
Shared memory	-	+

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 Connectors

6x mini-DisplayPort, 1x SDI

Portable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3

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:

Full HD	27−30 −37%	37 +37%
1440p	12−14 −50%	18 +50%
4K	7−8 −42.9%	10 +42.9%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	28 +0%	28 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	39 +0%	39 +0%
Elden Ring	34 +0%	34 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	23 +0%	23 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	14 +0%	14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	56 +0%	56 +0%
Metro Exodus	39 +0%	39 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Valorant	161 +0%	161 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	21 +0%	21 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	11 +0%	11 +0%
Dota 2	48 +0%	48 +0%
Elden Ring	66 +0%	66 +0%
Far Cry 5	36 +0%	36 +0%
Fortnite	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	47 +0%	47 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	36 +0%	36 +0%
Metro Exodus	27 +0%	27 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Valorant	30 +0%	30 +0%
World of Tanks	180−190 +0%	180−190 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	9 +0%	9 +0%
Dota 2	61 +0%	61 +0%
Far Cry 5	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	40 +0%	40 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Valorant	146 +0%	146 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	17 +0%	17 +0%
Elden Ring	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	17 +0%	17 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
World of Tanks	100−105 +0%	100−105 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5 +0%	5 +0%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	27 +0%	27 +0%
Metro Exodus	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	17 +0%	17 +0%
Valorant	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Dota 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Elden Ring	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Metro Exodus	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2 +0%	2 +0%
Dota 2	18 +0%	18 +0%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Fortnite	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	14 +0%	14 +0%
Valorant	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

This is how FirePro D500 and Radeon 680M compete in popular games:

Radeon 680M is 37% faster in 1080p
Radeon 680M is 50% faster in 1440p
Radeon 680M is 43% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	10.78	14.17
Recency	18 January 2014	3 January 2023
Chip lithography	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	274 Watt	50 Watt

Radeon 680M has a 31.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 448% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 680M is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro D500 in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro D500 is a workstation card while Radeon 680M is a notebook one.

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