AMD M2000 vs ATI M7740

#ad
Buy
VS
#ad
Buy

Combined performance score

ATI M7740
2.06
+89%

M7740 outperforms M2000 by 89% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking8281043
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money0.140.02
ArchitectureTerascale 1 (2008−2010)Terascale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameRV740Turks GLM
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date4 August 2009 (14 years old)1 July 2012 (11 years old)
Current price$255 $387
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

ATI M7740 has 600% better value for money than FirePro M2000.

Technical specs

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 cores640480
Core clock speed650 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors826 million716 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)60 Watt33 Watt
Texture fill rate20.8012.00
Floating-point performance832.0 gflops480.0 gflops

Size and compatibility

Information on FirePro M7740 and FirePro M2000 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. 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 sizelargemedium sized
Bus supportno datan/a
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Form factorno datachip-down
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

Memory

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 amount1 GB1 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz3200 MHz
Memory bandwidth54.14 GB/s25.6 GB/s
Shared memory--

Video outputs and ports

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
StereoOutput3Dno data1

API support

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

DirectX10.1 (10_1)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model4.15.0
OpenGL3.34.4
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/AN/A

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.

ATI M7740 2.06
+89%
FirePro M2000 1.09

M7740 outperforms M2000 by 89% in our combined benchmark results.


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%

ATI M7740 6626
+67.5%
FirePro M2000 3956

M7740 outperforms M2000 by 67% 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:

900p16−18
+77.8%
9
−77.8%
Full HD30−35
+87.5%
16
−87.5%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Battlefield 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Hitman 3 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Battlefield 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Hitman 3 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Battlefield 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Hitman 3 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Hitman 3 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how ATI M7740 and FirePro M2000 compete in popular games:

900p resolution:

  • ATI M7740 is 77.8% faster than FirePro M2000

1080p resolution:

  • ATI M7740 is 87.5% faster than FirePro M2000

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

  • in Hitman 3, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the ATI M7740 is 200% faster than the FirePro M2000.

All in all, in popular games:

  • ATI M7740 is ahead in 24 tests (83%)
  • there's a draw in 5 tests (17%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 2.06 1.09
Recency 4 August 2009 1 July 2012
Power consumption (TDP) 60 Watt 33 Watt

The FirePro M7740 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro M2000 in performance tests.


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

User ratings

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


ATI FirePro M7740
FirePro M7740
AMD FirePro M2000
FirePro M2000

Similar GPU comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

User ratings: view and submit

Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


5 1 vote

Rate ATI FirePro M7740 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 4 votes

Rate AMD FirePro M2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.