FirePro W2100 vs GeForce 9800M GTX

Place in the ranking	1063	843
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.04	no data
Power efficiency	1.09	6.22
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code name	G92	Oland
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	15 July 2008 (16 years ago)	12 August 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$328.50	no data

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 cores	112	320
CUDA cores per GPU	112	no data
Core clock speed	500 MHz	630 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	680 MHz
Number of transistors	754 million	950 million
Manufacturing process technology	65 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	26 Watt
Texture fill rate	28.00	13.60
Floating-point processing power	0.28 TFLOPS	0.4352 TFLOPS
Gigaflops	420	no data
ROPs	16	8
TMUs	56	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	large	no data
Bus support	no data	PCIe 3.0
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x8
Width	no data	1-slot
Form factor	no data	low profile / half length
Supplementary power connectors	None	None
SLI options	+	-

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	GDDR3	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	800 MHz	900 MHz
Memory bandwidth	51.2 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
DisplayPort count	no data	2
Dual-link DVI support	-	+

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 (11_1)
Shader Model	4.0	5.1
OpenGL	3.3	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	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. 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.

9800M GTX 1.18

FirePro W2100 2.34
+98.3%

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.

9800M GTX 454

FirePro W2100 903
+98.9%

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

7−8

−100%

14
+100%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

46.93

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4

−66.7%

5−6
+66.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −60%	8−9 +60%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −100%	6−7 +100%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 −1000%	10−12 +1000%
Hitman 3	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −35.7%	18−20 +35.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −37.5%	10−12 +37.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −15.6%	35−40 +15.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −60%	8−9 +60%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −100%	6−7 +100%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 −1000%	10−12 +1000%
Hitman 3	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −35.7%	18−20 +35.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −37.5%	10−12 +37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 −18.2%	12−14 +18.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −15.6%	35−40 +15.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −60%	8−9 +60%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 −1000%	10−12 +1000%
Hitman 3	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −35.7%	18−20 +35.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −37.5%	10−12 +37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 −18.2%	12−14 +18.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −15.6%	35−40 +15.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−150%

5−6
+150%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	1−2
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Hitman 3	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	0−1	1−2
Watch Dogs: Legion	5−6 −160%	12−14 +160%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5

−25%

5−6
+25%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

0−1

1−2

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	1−2
Far Cry 5	0−1	1−2

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−50%

3−4
+50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Metro Exodus	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Metro Exodus	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5

0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Watch Dogs: Legion

0−1

This is how 9800M GTX and FirePro W2100 compete in popular games:

FirePro W2100 is 100% faster in 1080p

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

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the FirePro W2100 is 1000% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

FirePro W2100 is ahead in 44 tests (86%)
there's a draw in 7 tests (14%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.18	2.34
Recency	15 July 2008	12 August 2014
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	65 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	26 Watt

FirePro W2100 has a 98.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 132.1% more advanced lithography process, and 188.5% lower power consumption.

The FirePro W2100 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9800M GTX in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 9800M GTX is a notebook card while FirePro W2100 is a workstation one.

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