RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile vs FirePro M2000

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro M2000 and RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

FirePro M2000
2012
1 GB GDDR5, 33 Watt
1.02

RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms M2000 by a whopping 3640% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1155134
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.3825.54
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameTurksAD106
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date1 July 2012 (13 years ago)21 March 2023 (3 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 cores4804608
Core clock speed500 MHz1395 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1695 MHz
Number of transistors716 million22,900 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)33 Watt115 Watt
Texture fill rate12.00244.1
Floating-point processing power0.48 TFLOPS15.62 TFLOPS
ROPs848
TMUs24144
Tensor Coresno data144
Ray Tracing Coresno data36
L1 Cacheno data4.5 MB
L2 Cacheno data32 MB

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 sizemedium sizedlarge
Bus supportn/ano data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Form factorchip-downno data

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 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth25.6 GB/s256.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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 ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent
StereoOutput3D+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.06.8
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.23.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA-8.9
DLSS-+

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.

FirePro M2000 1.02
RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile 38.15
+3640%

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.

FirePro M2000 427
Samples: 124
RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile 16020
+3652%
Samples: 317

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.

FirePro M2000 841
RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile 29411
+3397%

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 HD16
−3338%
550−600
+3338%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−3400%
70−75
+3400%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−3400%
70−75
+3400%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−3400%
70−75
+3400%
Fortnite 2−3
−3400%
70−75
+3400%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−3614%
260−270
+3614%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
−3400%
35−40
+3400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−3233%
300−310
+3233%
Valorant 30−35
−3610%
1150−1200
+3610%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 24−27
−3500%
900−950
+3500%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−3400%
70−75
+3400%
Dota 2 14−16
−3567%
550−600
+3567%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−3400%
70−75
+3400%
Fortnite 2−3
−3400%
70−75
+3400%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−3614%
260−270
+3614%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
−3400%
35−40
+3400%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−3400%
35−40
+3400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−3233%
300−310
+3233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−3567%
220−230
+3567%
Valorant 30−35
−3610%
1150−1200
+3610%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−3400%
70−75
+3400%
Dota 2 14−16
−3567%
550−600
+3567%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−3400%
70−75
+3400%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−3614%
260−270
+3614%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−3233%
300−310
+3233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−3567%
220−230
+3567%
Valorant 30−35
−3610%
1150−1200
+3610%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−3400%
70−75
+3400%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
−3400%
140−150
+3400%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 6−7
−3567%
220−230
+3567%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
−3536%
400−450
+3536%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2
−3400%
35−40
+3400%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−3567%
110−120
+3567%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−3400%
70−75
+3400%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 1−2
−3400%
35−40
+3400%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−3471%
500−550
+3471%
Valorant 5−6
−3500%
180−190
+3500%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−3400%
70−75
+3400%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−3400%
70−75
+3400%

This is how FirePro M2000 and RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile is 3233% faster in 900p
  • RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile is 3338% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.02 38.15
Recency 1 July 2012 21 March 2023
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 33 Watt 115 Watt

FirePro M2000 has 248% lower power consumption.

RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile, on the other hand, has a 3640% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro M2000 in performance tests.

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.


3.3 4 votes

Rate FirePro M2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 12 votes

Rate RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro M2000 or RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.