FirePro M6000 vs Radeon R9 M270X
In this comparison between FirePro M6000 and Radeon R9 M270X you will find out which graphics card performs better in today's games. Bear in mind that third-party versions may have more efficient cooling and higher clock speeds. This will increase cards' performance, though not by much. In addition to raw power you should also take into account the dimensions. Thicker models simply will not fit into a small mini-ITX case. The resolution of your monitor also affects the choice, since 4K gameplay requires a more powerful GPU. And don't overspend on the graphics card. Other parts of your build may also need to be upgraded, save some money for the CPU or power supply. For some people FirePro M6000 will be the best choice, for others Radeon R9 M270X will be their preference. Study the comparison tables below and make your choice.
Radeon R9 M270X
FirePro M6000 is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: FirePro M6000 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 M6000 here:
Main Specs
| FirePro M6000 | Radeon R9 M270X | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 43 Watt | |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 4 GB |
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
| Check Price |
- FirePro M6000 is connected by MXM-B (3.0), and Radeon R9 M270X uses PCIe 3.0 x16 interface.
- Radeon R9 M270X has 2 GB more memory, than FirePro M6000.
- FirePro M6000 is used in Mobile workstations, and Radeon R9 M270X - in Desktops.
- FirePro M6000 is build with GCN architecture, and Radeon R9 M270X - with GCN 1.0.
- Core clock speed of FirePro M6000 is 25 MHz higher, than Radeon R9 M270X.
- FirePro M6000 and Radeon R9 M270X are manufactured by 28 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of FirePro M6000 is 3375 MHz higher, than Radeon R9 M270X.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 8−9 | 6−7 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 4−5 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 20−22 | 16−18 |
| medium / 1080p | 10−12 | 8−9 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6000 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 22% more, than Radeon R9 M270X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 14−16 | 10−12 |
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 10−11 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 30−35 | 24−27 |
| medium / 1080p | 16−18 | 12−14 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6000 in Battlefield 5 is 26% more, than Radeon R9 M270X. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
| high / 1080p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| FirePro M6000 and Radeon R9 M270X have the same average FPS in Call of Duty: Warzone. | ||
| low / 768p | 150−160 | 130−140 |
| medium / 768p | 120−130 | 100−110 |
| ultra / 1080p | 65−70 | 50−55 |
| QHD / 1440p | 35−40 | 27−30 |
| 4K / 2160p | 27−30 | 27−30 |
| high / 768p | 95−100 | 75−80 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6000 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 19% more, than Radeon R9 M270X. | ||
| low / 768p | 55−60 | 55−60 |
| ultra / 1080p | 24−27 | 18−20 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6000 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 4% more, than Radeon R9 M270X. | ||
| low / 768p | 85−90 | 75−80 |
| medium / 768p | 65−70 | 55−60 |
| ultra / 1080p | 40−45 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6000 in Dota 2 is 18% more, than Radeon R9 M270X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 10−11 | 8−9 |
| ultra / 1080p | 9−10 | 7−8 |
| 4K / 2160p | 4−5 | 3−4 |
| low / 720p | 24−27 | 18−20 |
| medium / 1080p | 10−12 | 8−9 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6000 in Far Cry 5 is 33% more, than Radeon R9 M270X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 16−18 | 14−16 |
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 10−11 |
| low / 720p | 70−75 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 30−33 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6000 in Fortnite is 22% more, than Radeon R9 M270X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 14−16 | 12−14 |
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 10−12 |
| QHD / 1440p | 3−4 | 1−2 |
| low / 720p | 30−35 | 24−27 |
| medium / 1080p | 16−18 | 12−14 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6000 in Forza Horizon 4 is 33% more, than Radeon R9 M270X. | ||
| low / 768p | 60−65 | 50−55 |
| medium / 768p | 50−55 | 45−50 |
| high / 1080p | 16−18 | 12−14 |
| ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 6−7 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6000 in Grand Theft Auto V is 17% more, than Radeon R9 M270X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 6−7 | 4−5 |
| ultra / 1080p | 4−5 | 3−4 |
| 4K / 2160p | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 16−18 | 12−14 |
| medium / 1080p | 8−9 | 6−7 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6000 in Metro Exodus is 50% more, than Radeon R9 M270X. | ||
| low / 768p | 95−100 | 90−95 |
| high / 1080p | 95−100 | 85−90 |
| ultra / 1080p | 85−90 | 80−85 |
| medium / 1080p | 95−100 | 90−95 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6000 in Minecraft is 7% more, than Radeon R9 M270X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 18−20 | 16−18 |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 35−40 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 18−20 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6000 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 10% more, than Radeon R9 M270X. | ||
| high / 1080p | 12−14 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 8−9 | 7−8 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 16−18 | 10−12 |
| medium / 1080p | 12−14 | 10−12 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6000 in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 33% more, than Radeon R9 M270X. | ||
| low / 768p | 30−35 | 24−27 |
| medium / 768p | 21−24 | 16−18 |
| high / 1080p | 10−12 | 9−10 |
| ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 6−7 |
| 4K / 2160p | 6−7 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6000 in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 28% more, than Radeon R9 M270X. | ||
| low / 768p | 90−95 | 85−90 |
| medium / 768p | 50−55 | 40−45 |
| ultra / 1080p | 21−24 | 18−20 |
| high / 768p | 40−45 | 35−40 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro M6000 in World of Tanks is 13% more, than Radeon R9 M270X. | ||
Full Specs
| FirePro M6000 | Radeon R9 M270X | |
| Architecture | GCN | GCN 1.0 |
| Code name | Heathrow | Venus |
| Type | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 1 July 2012 | 21 March 2014 |
| Pipelines | 640 | 640 |
| Core clock speed | 750 MHz | 725 MHz |
| Boost Clock | 775 MHz | |
| Transistor count | 1,500 million | 1,500 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 32.00 | 31.00 |
| Floating-point performance | 1,024 gflops | 1,536 gflops |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 4500 MHz | 1125 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 72 GB/s | 72 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | |
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | Not Listed |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | |
| FreeSync | + | |
| Bus support | n/a | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
| Eyefinity | + | |
| HD3D | + | |
| PowerTune | + | |
| DualGraphics | + | |
| ZeroCore | + | |
| Switchable graphics | + | |
| Mantle | + | |
| Compute units | 10 | |
| Form factor | MXM-B | |
| StereoOutput3D | + | |
| Check Price |