UHD Graphics 600 vs FirePro M5950
Aggregate performance score
We've compared FirePro M5950 with UHD Graphics 600, including specs and performance data.
M5950 outperforms Graphics 600 by a whopping 291% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 784 | 1185 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 71 |
| Power efficiency | 6.83 | 12.24 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) | Generation 9.5 (2016−2020) |
| GPU code name | Whistler | Gemini Lake GT1 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 4 January 2011 (14 years ago) | 11 December 2017 (7 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 | 480 | 96 |
| Core clock speed | 725 MHz | 200 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 650 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 716 million | 189 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 5 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 17.40 | 7.800 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.696 TFLOPS | 0.1248 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 2 |
| TMUs | 24 | 12 |
| L1 Cache | 48 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | no data |
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 size | medium sized | no data |
| Bus support | n/a | no data |
| Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | Ring Bus |
| Form factor | MXM-A | no 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 type | GDDR5 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 57 GB/s | no data |
| 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 Connectors | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Quick Sync | no data | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | + |
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.
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.
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.
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.
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:
| 900p | 24
+300%
| 6−7
−300%
|
| Full HD | 26
+160%
| 10
−160%
|
| 1440p | 3−4
+200%
| 1
−200%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
+250%
|
2−3
−250%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
+250%
|
2−3
−250%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| Fortnite | 16−18
+325%
|
4−5
−325%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+167%
|
6−7
−167%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+75%
|
8−9
−75%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+269%
|
13
−269%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 55−60
+168%
|
21−24
−168%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
+250%
|
2−3
−250%
|
| Dota 2 | 30−33
+329%
|
7
−329%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| Fortnite | 16−18
+325%
|
4−5
−325%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+167%
|
6−7
−167%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 9−10
+350%
|
2−3
−350%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+75%
|
8−9
−75%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
+66.7%
|
6−7
−66.7%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+336%
|
11
−336%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
+250%
|
2−3
−250%
|
| Dota 2 | 30−33
+329%
|
7
−329%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+167%
|
6−7
−167%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+75%
|
8−9
−75%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
+66.7%
|
6−7
−66.7%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+60%
|
30−33
−60%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 16−18
+325%
|
4−5
−325%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 24−27
+500%
|
4−5
−500%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 27−30
+238%
|
8−9
−238%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
+343%
|
7−8
−343%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
| Valorant | 16−18
+300%
|
4−5
−300%
|
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 9−10
+350%
|
2−3
−350%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
This is how FirePro M5950 and UHD Graphics 600 compete in popular games:
- FirePro M5950 is 300% faster in 900p
- FirePro M5950 is 160% faster in 1080p
- FirePro M5950 is 200% faster in 1440p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the FirePro M5950 is 800% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, FirePro M5950 surpassed UHD Graphics 600 in all 37 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.97 | 0.76 |
| Recency | 4 January 2011 | 11 December 2017 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 5 Watt |
FirePro M5950 has a 290.8% higher aggregate performance score.
UHD Graphics 600, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 600% lower power consumption.
The FirePro M5950 is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics 600 in performance tests.
Be aware that FirePro M5950 is a mobile workstation graphics card while UHD Graphics 600 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.
