AMD FirePro M6100 vs AMD Radeon 680M Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in the database's average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 680M records an average benchmark score of 15270, while the AMD FirePro M6100 scores 13354. This places the 680M in the 57th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the FirePro M6100's 54th percentile.

Q: Which GPU wins in the only head-to-head benchmark available?

A: The AMD Radeon 680M wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 23468 against the FirePro M6100's 13354, a delta of 75.7%.

Q: What are the nearest rivals to the AMD Radeon 680M according to average score?

A: The Radeon 680M sits within 0.7% of several GPUs: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 (15283, -0.1%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (15290, -0.1%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM (15199, 0.5%), and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 (15171, 0.7%).

Q: What are the nearest rivals to the AMD FirePro M6100?

A: The FirePro M6100 is essentially tied with the AMD Radeon RX 5500M (13356, 0% delta), and sits near the AMD Radeon HD 8950M (13376, -0.2%), the AMD Radeon Pro 555X (13321, 0.3%), and the AMD Radeon Pro 555 (13407, -0.4%).

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 680M is listed as Active, with a release date of January 2023. The AMD FirePro M6100 is listed as End-of-life, with a release date of May 2014.

Q: What are the memory configurations of the two GPUs?

A: The Radeon 680M uses System Shared memory, with bandwidth described as System Dependent. The FirePro M6100 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, with 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth.

The Verdict

The database shows a clear overall winner in the AMD Radeon 680M. Its average benchmark score of 15270 is 14.3% higher than the FirePro M6100's 13354. In the only direct head-to-head comparison, Geekbench OpenCL, the 680M is 75.7% ahead. The 680M also holds the 57th percentile placement versus the FirePro's 54th, confirming the margin is consistent across the broader GPU landscape.

That said, the two cards serve very different roles. The Radeon 680M is an integrated graphics processor built on a 6 nm process with RDNA 2.0 architecture. It is an active product, designed for modern portable devices. The FirePro M6100 is a legacy MXM module based on GCN 2.0 on a 28 nm process, and it is end-of-life. Anyone looking at current workloads should favor the 680M without hesitation.

Buyers with legacy FirePro Mobile platforms, however, may have no choice but to consider the M6100. Its 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory and 96.00 GB/s bandwidth are fixed and independent of system RAM, which can be preferable in specific older workstation contexts. The 680M's System Shared memory means its effective bandwidth depends entirely on the host system's memory configuration.

For modern integrated graphics, the Radeon 680M is the recommended pick. For legacy MXM-based systems that require a drop-in FirePro module, the M6100 remains the only option of the two. The performance data, however, leaves no doubt about which is faster.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records one direct head-to-head benchmark: Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD Radeon 680M scores 23468, while the AMD FirePro M6100 scores 13354. That is a 75.7% advantage for the 680M, a substantial gap in raw compute throughput.

Looking at the broader benchmark data, the 680M also holds a significant edge in average score. Its 15270 average is 14.3% above the FirePro M6100's 13354. The percentile rankings reinforce this: the 680M sits at the 57th percentile of all GPUs, while the FirePro sits at the 54th.

The 680M's additional benchmark results include a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 378 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 21965. These are not available for the FirePro M6100, which only has the one OpenCL entry. The 680M's Vulkan score of 21965 is close to its OpenCL score of 23468, suggesting balanced performance across compute APIs. The FirePro M6100 cannot be measured in Vulkan under the same test set.

In practical terms, the 75.7% OpenCL lead means the Radeon 680M completes OpenCL compute workloads in roughly 57% of the time required by the FirePro M6100, assuming linear scaling. That is a decisive margin for any application that relies on OpenCL acceleration.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every core specification. The AMD Radeon 680M has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The AMD FirePro M6100 has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and only 16 ROPs. The 680M therefore has fewer shaders and TMUs, but double the ROP count.

Pixel and texture rates reflect this. The 680M reaches 70.40 GPixel/s and 105.6 GTexel/s. The FirePro M6100 reaches 17.60 GPixel/s and 61.60 GTexel/s. The 680M is 4 times faster in pixel throughput and 71.4% faster in texture throughput.

Compute throughput also favors the 680M. It delivers 3.379 TFLOPS FP32, while the FirePro M6100 delivers 1.971 TFLOPS FP32. The 680M is 71.4% ahead. The 680M also supports FP16 at 6.758 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), a feature entirely absent from the FirePro M6100's specifications.

The memory subsystems are fundamentally different. The 680M uses System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth. The FirePro M6100 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The clock speeds differ as well: the 680M has a 2000 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost, while the FirePro M6100 lists no base or boost clocks, only a memory clock of 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective).

The bus interfaces differ. The 680M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the FirePro M6100 uses MXM-B (3.0). The 680M is an IGP with no power connectors and a 50 W TDP. The FirePro M6100 is an MXM Module with no power connectors and no listed TDP. The 680M's slot width is listed as IGP, the FirePro's as MXM Module.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from entirely different architectural generations. The AMD Radeon 680M is built on RDNA 2.0, with the chip codename Rembrandt+. It is part of the Navi II IGP generation for Rembrandt Mobile. The AMD FirePro M6100 is built on GCN 2.0, with the chip codename Emerald, part of the FirePro Mobile (Mx100) generation.

The manufacturing process differs dramatically. The 680M uses a 6 nm process at TSMC, while the FirePro M6100 uses a 28 nm process, also at TSMC. The transistor counts reflect this gap: the 680M packs 13,100 million transistors on a 208 mm² die, while the FirePro M6100 has 2,080 million transistors on a 160 mm² die. Transistor density is 63.0M per mm² for the 680M versus 13.0M per mm² for the FirePro, a 4.8 times difference.

The 680M includes 12 ray tracing cores, a feature completely absent from the FirePro M6100. Neither GPU lists tensor cores. The 680M also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the FirePro M6100 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

The release timeline separates the two by nearly a decade. The FirePro M6100 launched in May 2014, while the 680M launched in January 2023. The 680M's predecessor is listed as Vega II IGP and its successor as Navi III IGP. The FirePro M6100's predecessor is FirePro Mobility and its successor is Radeon Pro Mobile.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 680M wins in virtually every measurable category. It has a higher average benchmark score, a higher percentile ranking, and a decisive 75.7% lead in the head-to-head OpenCL test. It also wins in pixel rate, texture rate, FP32 compute, and FP16 capability. The 680M is the clear choice for modern compute workloads, DirectX 12 Ultimate titles, and any application that can leverage ray tracing cores.

The 680M's system-shared memory model means it benefits from fast host memory, but it also means the GPU itself carries no dedicated VRAM. For systems with adequate memory bandwidth, the 680M's performance is strong. Its 50 W TDP and IGP form factor make it suitable for thin and light portable devices where a discrete GPU cannot fit.

The AMD FirePro M6100 wins in one specific area: dedicated memory. Its 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus provides 96.00 GB/s of fixed bandwidth that does not depend on the host system. For legacy applications that require predictable, dedicated VRAM, the M6100 offers that assurance. Its MXM Module form factor also makes it the only option of the two for systems that require a replaceable mobile graphics module.

The FirePro M6100 also has more shading units (896 vs 768) and more TMUs (56 vs 48), though its lower clocks and older architecture prevent those counts from translating into higher real-world scores. The 680M's architectural efficiency overcomes the shader deficit.

In summary: the Radeon 680M is the winner for modern, compute-heavy, and ray-traced workloads. The FirePro M6100 retains relevance only in legacy MXM systems that specifically require the FirePro Mobile form factor and dedicated memory.