Arc A580 vs FirePro M2000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

FirePro M2000
2012
1 GB GDDR5, 33 Watt
1.10

Arc A580 outperforms FirePro M2000 by a whopping 3665% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking104885
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.0239.28
ArchitectureTerascale 2 (2009−2015)no data
GPU code nameTurks GLMDG2-512
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date1 July 2012 (11 years ago)10 October 2023 (less than a year ago)
Current price$387 $337

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Arc A580 has 196300% better value for money than FirePro M2000.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores4803072
Core clock speed500 MHz1700 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2000 MHz
Number of transistors716 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)33 Watt175 Watt
Texture fill rate12.00384.0
Floating-point performance480.0 gflopsno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on FirePro M2000 and Arc A580 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportn/ano data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Widthno data2-slot
Form factorchip-downno data
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x 8-pin

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount1 GB8 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed3200 MHz16000 MHz
Memory bandwidth25.6 GB/s512.0 GB/s
Shared memory-no 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 outputs1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMIno data+
StereoOutput3D1no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.06.6
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.23.0
VulkanN/A1.3

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

FirePro M2000 1.10
Arc A580 41.41
+3665%

Arc A580 outperforms FirePro M2000 by 3665% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

FirePro M2000 424
Arc A580 11568
+2628%

Arc A580 outperforms FirePro M2000 by 2628% in Passmark.

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

FirePro M2000 841
Arc A580 35210
+4087%

Arc A580 outperforms FirePro M2000 by 4087% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

FirePro M2000 3956
Arc A580 95677
+2319%

Arc A580 outperforms FirePro M2000 by 2319% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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:

900p9
−3233%
300−350
+3233%
Full HD18
−450%
99
+450%
1440p1−2
−5500%
56
+5500%
4K0−136

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−3567%
110−120
+3567%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−10200%
103
+10200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−2000%
80−85
+2000%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−3567%
110−120
+3567%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−8700%
85−90
+8700%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−5000%
100−110
+5000%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−5250%
107
+5250%
Hitman 3 3−4
−2733%
85−90
+2733%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−1354%
189
+1354%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−9700%
95−100
+9700%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−3125%
258
+3125%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
−745%
93
+745%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−8500%
86
+8500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−2000%
80−85
+2000%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−3567%
110−120
+3567%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−8700%
85−90
+8700%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−5000%
100−110
+5000%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−7600%
150−160
+7600%
Hitman 3 3−4
−2733%
85−90
+2733%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−1200%
160−170
+1200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−9700%
95−100
+9700%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−2575%
214
+2575%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−4250%
174
+4250%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
−809%
100−105
+809%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−6300%
64
+6300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−2000%
80−85
+2000%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−3567%
110−120
+3567%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−8700%
85−90
+8700%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−4250%
87
+4250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−738%
109
+738%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−2113%
177
+2113%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−1600%
68
+1600%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
−445%
60
+445%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−9700%
95−100
+9700%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−7900%
80−85
+7900%
Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 95−100

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 54
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−1500%
60−65
+1500%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−3400%
35−40
+3400%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−4250%
87
+4250%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−7400%
75
+7400%
Hitman 3 7−8
−671%
50−55
+671%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
−2075%
87
+2075%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 55

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−1675%
70−75
+1675%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 35−40
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2
−5200%
50−55
+5200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−1650%
35
+1650%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 30
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 27−30
Far Cry 5 0−1 24−27
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2
−5000%
51
+5000%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−1200%
52
+1200%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−1750%
35−40
+1750%

This is how FirePro M2000 and Arc A580 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A580 is 3233% faster in 900p
  • Arc A580 is 450% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A580 is 5500% faster in 1440p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Assassin's Creed Odyssey, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Arc A580 is 10200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, Arc A580 surpassed FirePro M2000 in all 42 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.10 41.41
Recency 1 July 2012 10 October 2023
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 33 Watt 175 Watt

The Arc A580 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro M2000 in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro M2000 is a mobile workstation card while Arc A580 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 M2000
FirePro M2000
Intel Arc A580
Arc A580

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.


3.3 4 votes

Rate FirePro M2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 175 votes

Rate Arc A580 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.