FirePro M6100 vs GeForce GTX 295
When choosing between FirePro M6100 and GeForce GTX 295, it is worth examining the specifications of the models in detail. Do they meet the recommended requirements of modern games and software? Storage capacity, form factor, TDP, available ports, warranty and manufacturer support are all important. For example, the size of a PC case can limit the maximum thickness and length of the card. Often, instead of the factory overclocked card and RGB backlight, it is better to choose a reference model with a more efficient GPU. And make sure that your current power supply unit has the correct connection pins (using adapters is not recommended). This GPUs compare tool is meant to help you to choose the best graphics card for your build. Let's find out the difference between FirePro M6100 and GeForce GTX 295.
GeForce GTX 295
FirePro M6100 is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: FirePro M6100 is only used in laptop graphics. It has lower GPU clock speed compared to the desktop variant, which results in lower power consumption, but also 10-30% lower gaming performance. Check available laptop models with FirePro M6100 here:
Main Specs
| FirePro M6100 | GeForce GTX 295 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 289 Watt | |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 6-pin & 8-pin |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 1792 MB |
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI |
| Check Price |
- FirePro M6100 is connected by MXM-B (3.0), and GeForce GTX 295 uses PCIe 2.0 x16 interface.
- GeForce GTX 295 has 1790 GB more memory, than FirePro M6100.
- FirePro M6100 is used in Laptops, and GeForce GTX 295 - in Desktops.
- FirePro M6100 is build with GCN architecture, and GeForce GTX 295 - with Tesla 2.0.
- Core clock speed of GeForce GTX 295 is 142 MHz higher, than FirePro M6100.
- FirePro M6100 is manufactured by 28 nm process technology, and GeForce GTX 295 - by 55 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of FirePro M6100 is 5001 MHz higher, than GeForce GTX 295.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 10−11 | 3−4 |
| ultra / 1080p | 6−7 | 2−3 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 21−24 | 14−16 |
| medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 5−6 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6100 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 116% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 16−18 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 7−8 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 35−40 | 18−20 |
| medium / 1080p | 18−20 | 8−9 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6100 in Battlefield 5 is 109% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
| high / 1080p | − | 30−35 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| FirePro M6100 and GeForce GTX 295 have the same average FPS in Call of Duty: Warzone. | ||
| low / 768p | 170−180 | 120−130 |
| medium / 768p | 140−150 | 90−95 |
| ultra / 1080p | 70−75 | 40−45 |
| QHD / 1440p | 40−45 | 24−27 |
| 4K / 2160p | 30−33 | 18−20 |
| high / 768p | 100−110 | 65−70 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6100 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 53% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 55−60 | 80−85 |
| ultra / 1080p | 27−30 | 14−16 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 40−45 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 295 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 4% more, than FirePro M6100. | ||
| low / 768p | 95−100 | 75−80 |
| medium / 768p | 75−80 | 50−55 |
| ultra / 1080p | 45−50 | 27−30 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6100 in Dota 2 is 42% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 12−14 | 5−6 |
| ultra / 1080p | 10−12 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 4−5 | 2−3 |
| low / 720p | 27−30 | 14−16 |
| medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 6−7 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6100 in Far Cry 5 is 100% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 18−20 | 12−14 |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 7−8 |
| low / 720p | 75−80 | 50−55 |
| medium / 1080p | 35−40 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6100 in Fortnite is 68% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 16−18 | 7−8 |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | − |
| QHD / 1440p | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 35−40 | 20−22 |
| medium / 1080p | 20−22 | 9−10 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6100 in Forza Horizon 4 is 108% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 65−70 | 45−50 |
| medium / 768p | 55−60 | − |
| high / 1080p | 18−20 | 8−9 |
| ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 5−6 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| medium / 720p | − | 40−45 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6100 in Grand Theft Auto V is 55% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 6−7 | 3−4 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 1−2 |
| 4K / 2160p | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 18−20 | 8−9 |
| medium / 1080p | 9−10 | 4−5 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6100 in Metro Exodus is 150% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 100−110 | 85−90 |
| high / 1080p | − | 85−90 |
| ultra / 1080p | 90−95 | 80−85 |
| medium / 1080p | 95−100 | 85−90 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6100 in Minecraft is 15% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 18−20 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 12−14 |
| low / 720p | 40−45 | 27−30 |
| medium / 1080p | 20−22 | 14−16 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6100 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 44% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 12−14 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 7−8 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 18−20 | 8−9 |
| medium / 1080p | 12−14 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6100 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 62% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 35−40 | 16−18 |
| medium / 768p | 21−24 | 12−14 |
| high / 1080p | 12−14 | 6−7 |
| ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 5−6 |
| 4K / 2160p | 7−8 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6100 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 100% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 90−95 | 70−75 |
| medium / 768p | 50−55 | 35−40 |
| ultra / 1080p | 24−27 | 16−18 |
| high / 768p | 45−50 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6100 in World of Tanks is 38% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
Full Specs
| FirePro M6100 | GeForce GTX 295 | |
| Architecture | GCN | Tesla 2.0 |
| Code name | Bonaire | GT200B |
| Type | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 1 October 2013 | 8 January 2009 |
| Pipelines | 768 | 240 |
| Core clock speed | 1100 MHz | 1242 MHz |
| Transistor count | 2,080 million | 1,400 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 51.60 | 92.2 billion/sec |
| Floating-point performance | 1,651 gflops | 2x 596.2 gflops |
| Length | 10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm) | |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 896 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 6000 MHz | 999 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 88 GB/s | 223.8 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
| CUDA | + | |
| CUDA cores | 480 | |
| Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | |
| SLI options | + | |
| Multi monitor support | + | |
| HDMI | + | |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
| Audio input for HDMI | S/PDIF | |
| Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 196 Mh/s | |
| Laptop size | large | |
| CUDA cores per GPU | 240 | |
| Standard memory config per GPU | 896 MB | |
| Memory interface width per GPU | 448 Bit | |
| High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR) | 128bit | |
| Check Price |