FirePro W7100 vs GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER

Place in the ranking	215	357
Place by popularity	48	not in top-100
Power efficiency	18.18	6.91
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code name	TU116	Tonga
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	22 November 2019 (5 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	1280	1792
Core clock speed	1530 MHz	920 MHz
Boost clock speed	1725 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	6,600 million	5,000 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	400 Watt
Texture fill rate	138.0	103.0
Floating-point processing power	4.416 TFLOPS	3.297 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	80	112

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	no data	PCIe 3.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	229 mm	241 mm
Width	2-slot	1-slot
Form factor	no data	full height / full length
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	1x 6-pin

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	GDDR6	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	12000 MHz	1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	192.0 GB/s	160 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	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort	4x DisplayPort
HDMI	+	-
StereoOutput3D	-	+
DisplayPort count	no data	4
Dual-link DVI support	-	+
HD сomponent video output	-	+

Supported technologies

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

VR Ready	+	no data
Multi Monitor	+	no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (12_0)
Shader Model	6.5	6.3
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2.131
CUDA	7.5	-

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.

GTX 1650 SUPER 25.74
+75.5%

FirePro W7100 14.67

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.

GTX 1650 SUPER 10164
+75.4%

FirePro W7100 5794

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.

GTX 1650 SUPER 55744
+124%

FirePro W7100 24871

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

GTX 1650 SUPER 53337
+93.2%

FirePro W7100 27613

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	70 +100%	35−40 −100%
1440p	36 +100%	18−21 −100%
4K	23 +91.7%	12−14 −91.7%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	61 +103%	30−33 −103%
Cyberpunk 2077	63 +80%	35−40 −80%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	80−85 +77.8%	45−50 −77.8%
Counter-Strike 2	48 +77.8%	27−30 −77.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	47 +95.8%	24−27 −95.8%
Forza Horizon 4	121 +86.2%	65−70 −86.2%
Forza Horizon 5	75 +87.5%	40−45 −87.5%
Metro Exodus	89 +78%	50−55 −78%
Red Dead Redemption 2	84 +86.7%	45−50 −86.7%
Valorant	115 +76.9%	65−70 −76.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	80−85 +77.8%	45−50 −77.8%
Counter-Strike 2	39 +85.7%	21−24 −85.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	38 +81%	21−24 −81%
Dota 2	138 +84%	75−80 −84%
Far Cry 5	151 +77.6%	85−90 −77.6%
Fortnite	130−140 +85.7%	70−75 −85.7%
Forza Horizon 4	101 +83.6%	55−60 −83.6%
Forza Horizon 5	75 +87.5%	40−45 −87.5%
Grand Theft Auto V	103 +87.3%	55−60 −87.3%
Metro Exodus	61 +103%	30−33 −103%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	160−170 +81.1%	90−95 −81.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30 +87.5%	16−18 −87.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	85−90 +93.3%	45−50 −93.3%
Valorant	100−110 +76.7%	60−65 −76.7%
World of Tanks	260−270 +87.9%	140−150 −87.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	80−85 +77.8%	45−50 −77.8%
Counter-Strike 2	35 +94.4%	18−20 −94.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	32 +77.8%	18−20 −77.8%
Dota 2	191 +91%	100−105 −91%
Far Cry 5	75−80 +75.6%	45−50 −75.6%
Forza Horizon 4	83 +84.4%	45−50 −84.4%
Forza Horizon 5	51 +88.9%	27−30 −88.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	160−170 +81.1%	90−95 −81.1%
Valorant	100−110 +76.7%	60−65 −76.7%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	45 +87.5%	24−27 −87.5%
Grand Theft Auto V	45 +87.5%	24−27 −87.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +84.2%	95−100 −84.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	11 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
World of Tanks	170−180 +83.2%	95−100 −83.2%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 +76.7%	30−33 −76.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	19 +90%	10−11 −90%
Far Cry 5	75−80 +75.6%	45−50 −75.6%
Forza Horizon 4	60 +100%	30−33 −100%
Forza Horizon 5	54 +80%	30−33 −80%
Metro Exodus	55 +83.3%	30−33 −83.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 +90.5%	21−24 −90.5%
Valorant	70−75 +80%	40−45 −80%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Dota 2	45 +87.5%	24−27 −87.5%
Grand Theft Auto V	45 +87.5%	24−27 −87.5%
Metro Exodus	16 +77.8%	9−10 −77.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	80−85 +80%	45−50 −80%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +88.9%	9−10 −88.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45 +87.5%	24−27 −87.5%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 +100%	14−16 −100%
Counter-Strike 2	2 +100%	1−2 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	5 +150%	2−3 −150%
Dota 2	80 +77.8%	45−50 −77.8%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +94.4%	18−20 −94.4%
Fortnite	30−35 +83.3%	18−20 −83.3%
Forza Horizon 4	30 +87.5%	16−18 −87.5%
Forza Horizon 5	39 +85.7%	21−24 −85.7%
Valorant	35−40 +94.4%	18−20 −94.4%

This is how GTX 1650 SUPER and FirePro W7100 compete in popular games:

GTX 1650 SUPER is 100% faster in 1080p
GTX 1650 SUPER is 100% faster in 1440p
GTX 1650 SUPER is 92% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	25.74	14.67
Recency	22 November 2019	12 August 2014
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	400 Watt

GTX 1650 SUPER has a 75.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 300% lower power consumption.

FirePro W7100, on the other hand, has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro W7100 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is a desktop card while FirePro W7100 is a workstation one.

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