Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
AMD FirePro M2000 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 430
Combined performance score
GeForce GT 430 outperforms FirePro M2000 by 42% in our combined benchmark results.
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in performance ranking | 924 | 1043 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Value for money | 0.05 | 0.02 |
Architecture | Fermi (2010−2014) | Terascale 2 (2009−2015) |
GPU code name | GF108 | Turks GLM |
Market segment | Desktop | Mobile workstation |
Release date | 11 October 2010 (13 years old) | 1 July 2012 (11 years old) |
Launch price (MSRP) | $79 | no data |
Current price | $59 (0.7x MSRP) | $387 |
GT 430 has 150% 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 cores | 96 | 480 |
CUDA cores per GPU | 96 | no data |
Core clock speed | 700 MHz | 500 MHz |
Number of transistors | 585 million | 716 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 40 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 49 Watt | 33 Watt |
Maximum GPU temperature | 98 °C | no data |
Texture fill rate | 11.2 billion/sec | 12.00 |
Floating-point performance | 268.8 gflops | 480.0 gflops |
Size and compatibility
Information on GeForce GT 430 and FirePro M2000 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). 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 size | no data | medium sized |
Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 x 16 | n/a |
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Length | 5.7" (14.5 cm) | no data |
Height | 2.713" (6.9 cm) | no data |
Width | 2-slot | no data |
Form factor | no data | chip-down |
Supplementary power connectors | None | no 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 type | GDDR3 | GDDR5 |
Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 1 GB |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 800 - 900 MHz (1600 - 1800 data rate) | 3200 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | 25.6 - 28.8 GB/s | 25.6 GB/s |
Shared memory | no data | - |
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 Connectors | HDMIVGA (optional)Mini HDMIDual Link DVI | No outputs |
HDMI | + | no data |
Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
StereoOutput3D | no data | 1 |
Audio input for HDMI | Internal | no data |
API support
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 11.2 (11_0) |
Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.0 |
OpenGL | 4.2 | 4.4 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
CUDA | + | no data |
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.
GeForce GT 430 outperforms FirePro M2000 by 42% in our combined benchmark results.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.
Benchmark coverage: 25%
GeForce GT 430 outperforms FirePro M2000 by 42% in Passmark.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 9%
GeForce GT 430 outperforms FirePro M2000 by 93% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.
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:
900p | 12−14
+33.3%
| 9
−33.3%
|
Full HD | 21−24
+31.3%
| 16
−31.3%
|
Performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Battlefield 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Hitman 3 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Battlefield 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Hitman 3 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Metro Exodus | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Battlefield 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
Hitman 3 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
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 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
This is how GT 430 and FirePro M2000 compete in popular games:
900p resolution:
- GT 430 is 33.3% faster than FirePro M2000
1080p resolution:
- GT 430 is 31.3% 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 GT 430 is 100% faster than the FirePro M2000.
All in all, in popular games:
- GT 430 is ahead in 17 tests (59%)
- there's a draw in 12 tests (41%)
Advantages and disadvantages
Performance score | 1.55 | 1.09 |
Recency | 11 October 2010 | 1 July 2012 |
Power consumption (TDP) | 49 Watt | 33 Watt |
The GeForce GT 430 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro M2000 in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GT 430 is a desktop card while FirePro M2000 is a mobile workstation one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar GPU comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.