FirePro S9000 vs Quadro M520
When choosing between FirePro S9000 and Quadro M520, 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 S9000 and Quadro M520.
FirePro S9000
Quadro M520 is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: Quadro M520 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 Quadro M520 here:
Main Specs
| FirePro S9000 | Quadro M520 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 25 Watt |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 8-pin | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | 2 GB |
| Display Connectors | 1x DisplayPort | |
| Check Price |
- FirePro S9000 has 1300% more power consumption, than Quadro M520.
- FirePro S9000 has 4 GB more memory, than Quadro M520.
- FirePro S9000 is used in Desktops, and Quadro M520 - in Mobile workstations.
- FirePro S9000 is build with GCN 1.0 architecture, and Quadro M520 - with Maxwell.
- Core clock speed of FirePro S9000 is 144 MHz higher, than Quadro M520.
- FirePro S9000 and Quadro M520 are manufactured by 28 nm process technology.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 35−40 | 9−10 |
| ultra / 1080p | 21−24 | 5−6 |
| QHD / 1440p | 16−18 | 0−1 |
| 4K / 2160p | 10−11 | − |
| low / 720p | 60−65 | 21−24 |
| medium / 1080p | 40−45 | 12−14 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 241% more, than Quadro M520. | ||
| high / 1080p | 55−60 | 16−18 |
| ultra / 1080p | 45−50 | 12−14 |
| QHD / 1440p | 35−40 | 0−1 |
| 4K / 2160p | 18−20 | − |
| low / 720p | 100−110 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 60−65 | 16−18 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Battlefield 5 is 257% more, than Quadro M520. | ||
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 45−50 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Call of Duty: Warzone is 10% more, than Quadro M520. | ||
| low / 768p | 250−260 | 160−170 |
| medium / 768p | 220−230 | 130−140 |
| ultra / 1080p | 180−190 | 65−70 |
| QHD / 1440p | 110−120 | 35−40 |
| 4K / 2160p | 70−75 | 27−30 |
| high / 768p | 210−220 | 100−110 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 98% more, than Quadro M520. | ||
| low / 768p | 60−65 | 55−60 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 24−27 |
| medium / 1080p | 55−60 | 45−50 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 15% more, than Quadro M520. | ||
| low / 768p | 120−130 | 90−95 |
| medium / 768p | 110−120 | 70−75 |
| ultra / 1080p | 100−110 | 45−50 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Dota 2 is 64% more, than Quadro M520. | ||
| high / 1080p | 45−50 | 10−12 |
| ultra / 1080p | 40−45 | 10−11 |
| QHD / 1440p | 27−30 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 14−16 | 4−5 |
| low / 720p | 80−85 | 24−27 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 12−14 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Far Cry 5 is 291% more, than Quadro M520. | ||
| high / 1080p | 60−65 | 18−20 |
| ultra / 1080p | 45−50 | 12−14 |
| QHD / 1440p | 27−30 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 27−30 | − |
| low / 720p | 180−190 | 70−75 |
| medium / 1080p | 110−120 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Fortnite is 200% more, than Quadro M520. | ||
| high / 1080p | 60−65 | 16−18 |
| ultra / 1080p | 45−50 | 14−16 |
| QHD / 1440p | 30−35 | 3−4 |
| 4K / 2160p | 24−27 | − |
| low / 720p | 100−110 | 35−40 |
| medium / 1080p | 65−70 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Forza Horizon 4 is 250% more, than Quadro M520. | ||
| low / 768p | 140−150 | 60−65 |
| medium / 768p | 120−130 | 55−60 |
| high / 1080p | 70−75 | 18−20 |
| ultra / 1080p | 30−35 | 8−9 |
| QHD / 1440p | 21−24 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Grand Theft Auto V is 158% more, than Quadro M520. | ||
| high / 1080p | 24−27 | 6−7 |
| ultra / 1080p | 20−22 | 4−5 |
| QHD / 1440p | 16−18 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 8−9 | 1−2 |
| low / 720p | 65−70 | 18−20 |
| medium / 1080p | 30−35 | 8−9 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Metro Exodus is 287% more, than Quadro M520. | ||
| low / 768p | 130−140 | 100−110 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 90−95 |
| medium / 1080p | 120−130 | 95−100 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Minecraft is 28% more, than Quadro M520. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 18−20 |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 100−110 | 40−45 |
| medium / 1080p | 18−20 | 20−22 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 76% more, than Quadro M520. | ||
| high / 1080p | 24−27 | 12−14 |
| ultra / 1080p | 16−18 | 8−9 |
| QHD / 1440p | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| 4K / 2160p | 7−8 | − |
| low / 720p | 65−70 | 16−18 |
| medium / 1080p | 35−40 | 12−14 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 200% more, than Quadro M520. | ||
| low / 768p | 130−140 | 35−40 |
| medium / 768p | 85−90 | 21−24 |
| high / 1080p | 45−50 | 12−14 |
| ultra / 1080p | 24−27 | 8−9 |
| 4K / 2160p | 16−18 | 7−8 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 264% more, than Quadro M520. | ||
| low / 768p | 90−95 | 90−95 |
| medium / 768p | 60−65 | 50−55 |
| ultra / 1080p | 50−55 | 24−27 |
| high / 768p | 60−65 | 40−45 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in World of Tanks is 26% more, than Quadro M520. | ||
Full Specs
| FirePro S9000 | Quadro M520 | |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Maxwell |
| Code name | Tahiti | |
| Type | Workstation | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 24 August 2012 | 13 January 2017 |
| Pipelines | 1792 | 384 |
| Core clock speed | 900 MHz | 756 MHz |
| Boost Clock | 1019 MHz | |
| Transistor count | 4,313 million | |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 100.8 | |
| Floating-point performance | 3,226 gflops | |
| Length | 267 mm | |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5500 MHz | |
| Memory bandwidth | 264 GB/s | 40 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | |
| Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 92 Mh/s | |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
| Optimus | + | |
| Form factor | full height / full length | |
| DisplayPort count | 1 | |
| Dual-link DVI support | + | |
| nView Display Management | + | |
| 3D Stereo | + | |
| Check Price |