Radeon HD 6570 vs FirePro W8000
Aggregate performance score
We've compared FirePro W8000 with Radeon HD 6570, including specs and performance data.
W8000 outperforms HD 6570 by a whopping 664% 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 | 470 | 1040 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.48 | 0.07 |
| Power efficiency | 3.44 | 1.69 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | Tahiti | Turks |
| Market segment | Workstation | Desktop |
| Design | no data | reference |
| Release date | 14 June 2012 (13 years ago) | 19 April 2011 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $1,599 | $79 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
FirePro W8000 has 586% better value for money than HD 6570.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 1792 | 480 |
| Core clock speed | 900 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 650 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 4,313 million | 716 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 225 Watt | 40 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 100.8 | 15.60 |
| Floating-point processing power | 3.226 TFLOPS | 0.624 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 8 |
| TMUs | 112 | 24 |
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).
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 2.1 x16 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 279 mm | 168 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | 1-slot |
| Form factor | full height / full length | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 6-pin | None |
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 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1375 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 176 GB/s | 28.8 GB/s |
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 | 4x DisplayPort, 1x SDI | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
| Eyefinity | - | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
| DisplayPort support | - | + |
| StereoOutput3D | + | - |
| DisplayPort count | 4 | no data |
| Dual-link DVI support | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| CrossFire | - | + |
| UVD | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | DirectX® 11 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | - |
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.
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.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 10.16 | 1.33 |
| Recency | 14 June 2012 | 19 April 2011 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 225 Watt | 40 Watt |
FirePro W8000 has a 663.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.
HD 6570, on the other hand, has 462.5% lower power consumption.
The FirePro W8000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6570 in performance tests.
Be aware that FirePro W8000 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon HD 6570 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
