Quadro K1100M vs FirePro M6000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro M6000 and Quadro K1100M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

FirePro M6000
2012
2 GB GDDR5, 43 Watt
4.72
+66.8%

M6000 outperforms K1100M by an impressive 67% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking647796
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data1.06
Power efficiency7.534.32
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameHeathrowGK107
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date1 July 2012 (12 years ago)23 July 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$109.94

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores640384
Core clock speed800 MHz706 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)43 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate32.0022.59
Floating-point processing power1.024 TFLOPS0.5422 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs4032

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 sizedmedium sized
Bus supportn/ano data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)MXM-A (3.0)
Form factorMXM-Bno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz700 MHz
Memory bandwidth72 GB/s44.8 GB/s
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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
Display Portno data1.2
StereoOutput3D+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus-+
3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.131+
CUDA-+

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. 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 M6000 4.72
+66.8%
K1100M 2.83

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 M6000 1820
+66.8%
K1100M 1091

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 M6000 2422
+32.6%
K1100M 1827

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.

FirePro M6000 10744
+19.5%
K1100M 8992

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:

900p58
+93.3%
30−35
−93.3%
Full HD39
+129%
17
−129%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data6.47

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+93.3%
14−16
−93.3%
Hitman 3 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+40.9%
21−24
−40.9%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+18.4%
35−40
−18.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+93.3%
14−16
−93.3%
Hitman 3 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+40.9%
21−24
−40.9%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−35.3%
23
+35.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+18.4%
35−40
−18.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+93.3%
14−16
−93.3%
Hitman 3 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+40.9%
21−24
−40.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+325%
4
−325%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+18.4%
35−40
−18.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Hitman 3 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+76.5%
16−18
−76.5%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Hitman 3 1−2 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%

This is how FirePro M6000 and K1100M compete in popular games:

  • FirePro M6000 is 93% faster in 900p
  • FirePro M6000 is 129% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Assassin's Creed Valhalla, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the FirePro M6000 is 400% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the K1100M is 35% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • FirePro M6000 is ahead in 59 tests (97%)
  • K1100M is ahead in 1 test (2%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.72 2.83
Recency 1 July 2012 23 July 2013
Power consumption (TDP) 43 Watt 45 Watt

FirePro M6000 has a 66.8% higher aggregate performance score, and 4.7% lower power consumption.

K1100M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year.

The FirePro M6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro K1100M in performance tests.


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 M6000
FirePro M6000
NVIDIA Quadro K1100M
Quadro K1100M

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.


3.5 15 votes

Rate FirePro M6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 223 votes

Rate Quadro K1100M 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.