FirePro W600 vs Radeon HD 6930
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 6930 with FirePro W600, including specs and performance data.
HD 6930 outperforms W600 by an impressive 67% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 604 | 739 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.90 | 0.20 |
| Power efficiency | 2.79 | 4.16 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 3 (2010−2013) | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) |
| GPU code name | Cayman | Cape Verde |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Release date | 1 December 2011 (14 years ago) | 13 June 2012 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $180 | $599 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
HD 6930 has 850% better value for money than FirePro W600.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 750 MHz | 750 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 2,640 million | 1,500 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 186 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 60.00 | 24.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.92 TFLOPS | 0.768 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 16 |
| TMUs | 80 | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB | 128 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 256 KB |
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).
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 220 mm | 163 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 6-pin | 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 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1200 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 153.6 GB/s | 64 GB/s |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort | 6x mini-DisplayPort |
| HDMI | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 (11_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 6.75 | 4.05 |
| Recency | 1 December 2011 | 13 June 2012 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 186 Watt | 75 Watt |
HD 6930 has a 67% higher aggregate performance score.
FirePro W600, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 months, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 43% more advanced lithography process, and 148% lower power consumption.
The Radeon HD 6930 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro W600 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon HD 6930 is a desktop graphics card while FirePro W600 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.
