FirePro W2100 vs GeForce 710M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce 710M with FirePro W2100, including specs and performance data.
W2100 outperforms 710M by an impressive 98% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1075 | 856 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 5.43 | 6.21 |
| Architecture | Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015) | GCN 1.0 (2011−2020) |
| GPU code name | GK208 | Oland |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 24 July 2013 (11 years ago) | 12 August 2014 (10 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 | 192 | 320 |
| Core clock speed | 719 MHz | 630 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 800 MHz | 680 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 915 million | 950 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 26 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 11.50 | 13.60 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.2761 TFLOPS | 0.4352 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 8 |
| TMUs | 16 | 20 |
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 | PCI Express 2.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Form factor | no data | low profile / half length |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 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 | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Standard memory configuration | DDR3 | no data |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB/s | 28.8 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 Connectors | No outputs | 2x DisplayPort |
| eDP 1.2 signal support | Up to 2560x1600 | no data |
| LVDS signal support | Up to 1920x1200 | no data |
| VGA аnalog display support | Up to 2048x1536 | no data |
| DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support | Up to 2560x1600 | no data |
| HDMI | + | - |
| HDCP content protection | + | - |
| DisplayPort count | no data | 2 |
| Dual-link DVI support | - | + |
| 7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI | + | - |
| TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| AppAcceleration | - | + |
| Blu-Ray 3D Support | + | - |
| H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | + | - |
| Optimus | + | - |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 API | 12 (11_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.1.126 | 1.2.131 |
| 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.
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 Fire Strike Graphics
Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.
3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.
GeekBench 5 OpenCL
Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.
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:
| Full HD | 6−7
−117%
| 13
+117%
|
| 4K | 1−2
−100%
| 2
+100%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−33.3%
|
8−9
+33.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−400%
|
5−6
+400%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−33.3%
|
8−9
+33.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−66.7%
|
10−11
+66.7%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 6−7
−50%
|
9−10
+50%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−400%
|
5−6
+400%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−33.3%
|
8−9
+33.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11
−50%
|
14−16
+50%
|
| Fortnite | 5−6
−140%
|
12−14
+140%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−66.7%
|
10−11
+66.7%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 0−1 | 5−6 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−69.2%
|
21−24
+69.2%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 6−7
−50%
|
9−10
+50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
| World of Tanks | 24−27
−69.2%
|
40−45
+69.2%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−400%
|
5−6
+400%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−33.3%
|
8−9
+33.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11
−50%
|
14−16
+50%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−66.7%
|
10−11
+66.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−69.2%
|
21−24
+69.2%
|
1440p
High Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−129%
|
16−18
+129%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| World of Tanks | 6−7
−150%
|
14−16
+150%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 2−3 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| Valorant | 6−7
−33.3%
|
8−9
+33.3%
|
4K
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−100%
|
6−7
+100%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 2−3 |
| Valorant | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Valorant | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Full HD
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Valorant | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Dota 2 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Valorant | 0−1 | 0−1 |
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
Ultra Preset
| Fortnite | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
This is how GeForce 710M and FirePro W2100 compete in popular games:
- FirePro W2100 is 117% faster in 1080p
- FirePro W2100 is 100% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the FirePro W2100 is 400% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- FirePro W2100 is ahead in 32 tests (68%)
- there's a draw in 15 tests (32%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.17 | 2.32 |
| Recency | 24 July 2013 | 12 August 2014 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 26 Watt |
GeForce 710M has 73.3% lower power consumption.
FirePro W2100, on the other hand, has a 98.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.
The FirePro W2100 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 710M in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce 710M is a notebook card while FirePro W2100 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
