FirePro M2000 vs Radeon HD 7570M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 7570M with FirePro M2000, including specs and performance data.

HD 7570M
2012
1 GB GDDR5, 13 Watt
1.11

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking10851087
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency5.892.32
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameThamesTurks
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date7 January 2012 (13 years ago)1 July 2012 (12 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 cores480480
Core clock speed500 MHz500 MHz
Boost clock speed650 MHzno data
Number of transistors716 million716 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)13 Watt33 Watt
Texture fill rate12.0012.00
Floating-point processing power0.48 TFLOPS0.48 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs2424

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 sizemedium sizedmedium sized
Bus supportno datan/a
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Form factorno datachip-down

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 amount1 GB1 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth25.6 GB/s25.6 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
StereoOutput3D-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model5.05.0
OpenGL4.44.4
OpenCL1.21.2
VulkanN/AN/A

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.

HD 7570M 1.11
FirePro M2000 1.11

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.

HD 7570M 427
+0.5%
FirePro M2000 425

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

HD 7570M 829
FirePro M2000 841
+1.4%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

HD 7570M 3727
FirePro M2000 3956
+6.1%

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:

900p14
+55.6%
9
−55.6%
Full HD19
+35.7%
14
−35.7%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
World of Tanks 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
World of Tanks 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Valorant 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

This is how HD 7570M and FirePro M2000 compete in popular games:

  • HD 7570M is 56% faster in 900p
  • HD 7570M is 36% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 35 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Recency 7 January 2012 1 July 2012
Power consumption (TDP) 13 Watt 33 Watt

HD 7570M has 153.8% lower power consumption.

FirePro M2000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 months.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon HD 7570M and FirePro M2000.

Be aware that Radeon HD 7570M is a notebook graphics 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.

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.


AMD Radeon HD 7570M
Radeon HD 7570M
AMD FirePro M2000
FirePro M2000

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.


3.7 94 votes

Rate Radeon HD 7570M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 4 votes

Rate FirePro M2000 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.