FirePro W6150M vs Quadro M600M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M600M and FirePro W6150M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro M600M
2015
2 GB GDDR5, 30 Watt
5.42

W6150M outperforms M600M by a small 8% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking612592
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency12.94no data
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code nameGM107Saturn
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date18 August 2015 (9 years ago)12 November 2015 (9 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 cores384768
Core clock speed837 MHz1075 MHz
Boost clock speed876 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,870 million2,080 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30 Wattno data
Texture fill rate14.0251.60
Floating-point processing power0.6728 TFLOPS1.651 TFLOPS
ROPs816
TMUs1648

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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)MXM-B (3.0)
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz1375 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s88 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (12_0)
Shader Model5.16.3
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan+1.2.131
CUDA5.0-

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.

Quadro M600M 5.42
W6150M 5.88
+8.5%

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.

Quadro M600M 2171
W6150M 2358
+8.6%

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 HD19
+5.6%
18−21
−5.6%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
−5.9%
18−20
+5.9%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
−5.9%
18−20
+5.9%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
−5.9%
18−20
+5.9%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Fortnite 30−35
−6.1%
35−40
+6.1%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
−6.4%
50−55
+6.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
−5.9%
18−20
+5.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
World of Tanks 90−95
−5.6%
95−100
+5.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
−5.9%
18−20
+5.9%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
−6.4%
50−55
+6.4%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
World of Tanks 40−45
+2.5%
40−45
−2.5%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
−5.9%
18−20
+5.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−5.9%
18−20
+5.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−5.9%
18−20
+5.9%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
−5.9%
18−20
+5.9%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Valorant 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how Quadro M600M and W6150M compete in popular games:

  • Quadro M600M is 6% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.42 5.88
Recency 18 August 2015 12 November 2015
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB

W6150M has a 8.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 months, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro M600M and FirePro W6150M.


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

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA Quadro M600M
Quadro M600M
AMD FirePro W6150M
FirePro W6150M

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.1 23 votes

Rate Quadro M600M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate FirePro W6150M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.