AMD FirePro M6100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Comparison

AMD FirePro M6100 targets a very different segment than NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660, and the recorded data reflects that divide. The FirePro M6100 is a mobile workstation part from 2014, built on AMD's GCN 2.0 architecture. The GTX 1660 is a desktop consumer card from 2019, built on NVIDIA's Turing architecture. The database shows one clear head-to-head benchmark, and the specification sheets reveal fundamental differences in nearly every measured category. This analysis walks through the data to show where each card holds an advantage, what the benchmark results mean, and which user profile each GPU serves.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data gives the GTX 1660 a decisive victory in the only shared test. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 1660 scores 47,850, while the FirePro M6100 scores 13,354. That is a 72.1% delta in favor of the NVIDIA card, meaning the GTX 1660 delivers roughly three and a half times the raw OpenCL performance of the AMD part.

For the FirePro M6100, its wins are not in raw compute but in context. It is a mobile module with a 28 nm process, drawing no external power connectors, and it fits into the MXM-B form factor. Its 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus delivers 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The database positions it at the 54th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 13,354. Its nearest rivals in the database are all AMD parts: the Radeon RX 5500M (score 13,356, 0% delta), the Radeon HD 8950M (score 13,376, -0.2% delta), the Radeon Pro 555X (score 13,321, 0.3% delta), and the Radeon Pro 555 (score 13,407, -0.4% delta). This clustering suggests the FirePro M6100 sits in a narrow performance band among mobile AMD GPUs of its era.

The GTX 1660, by contrast, wins on every measurable performance metric. Beyond the OpenCL test, it records scores in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 (1,065), Geekbench Vulkan (50,137), Passmark DirectX 10 (61), DirectX 11 (79), DirectX 12 (49), DirectX 9 (177), G2D (776), G3D (11,646), and GPU Compute (4,963). Its average benchmark score is 11,680, which places it at the 51st percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT (score 11,627, 0.5% delta), the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M (score 11,528, 1.3% delta), the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT (score 11,842, -1.4% delta), and the NVIDIA Tesla K20c (score 11,479, 1.8% delta). The GTX 1660 essentially trades blows with these cards, sitting within a narrow band of scores, which shows it is competitive with a much newer and more powerful generation of GPUs.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 scores 47,850 in Geekbench OpenCL, compared to 13,354 for the AMD FirePro M6100. The delta is -72.1% from the GTX 1660's perspective, meaning the NVIDIA card is far ahead.

Q: How does the FirePro M6100 compare to its closest rivals in the database?

A: The FirePro M6100's average benchmark score is 13,354. Its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 5500M, scores 13,356, a 0% delta. The AMD Radeon HD 8950M scores 13,376 (-0.2% delta), the AMD Radeon Pro 555X scores 13,321 (0.3% delta), and the AMD Radeon Pro 555 scores 13,407 (-0.4% delta). All four rivals are within a fraction of a percent of the FirePro's score.

Q: What memory configuration does each card use?

A: The FirePro M6100 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 1660 has 6 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit bus, yielding 192.1 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel rate?

A: The GTX 1660 has a pixel rate of 85.68 GPixel/s, while the FirePro M6100 has a pixel rate of 17.60 GPixel/s. The NVIDIA card is substantially ahead in this fill-rate metric.

Q: Are both cards end-of-life products?

A: Yes. The database lists both the AMD FirePro M6100 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 as end-of-life production status.

Q: What is the transistor density of each chip?

A: The FirePro M6100's Emerald chip, built on a 28 nm process, has a transistor density of 13.0M per mm². The GTX 1660's TU116 chip, built on a 12 nm process, has a transistor density of 23.2M per mm².

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records exactly one shared benchmark between these two cards: Geekbench OpenCL. The results are stark. The GTX 1660 posts 47,850 points, and the FirePro M6100 posts 13,354 points. The delta is -72.1%, which means the NVIDIA card outperforms the AMD card by a factor of 3.58 in this test.

That single result tells a larger story. The GTX 1660's OpenCL score is more than three times the FirePro's, and this gap is consistent with the rest of their specifications. The GTX 1660 has 1,408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 48 raster operations units. The FirePro M6100 has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Those hardware counts translate directly into compute throughput: the GTX 1660 delivers 5.027 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the FirePro M6100 delivers 1.971 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA card also has a 2:1 FP16 rate of 10.05 TFLOPS, a feature the AMD card does not list.

Memory bandwidth further widens the gap. The GTX 1660's 192.1 GB/s is exactly double the FirePro's 96.00 GB/s. The GTX 1660 also has three times the memory capacity (6 GB vs. 2 GB) and a wider 192-bit bus versus the AMD card's 128-bit bus. Texture fill rate follows the same pattern: the GTX 1660 achieves 157.1 GTexel/s, while the FirePro M6100 achieves 61.60 GTexel/s. Pixel rate is similarly lopsided, with the GTX 1660 at 85.68 GPixel/s against the FirePro's 17.60 GPixel/s.

The database also shows the GTX 1660's performance in other test suites, which provides context for its overall standing. In Passmark G3D, it scores 11,646. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 50,137. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it scores 1,065. These figures are not directly comparable to the FirePro M6100, as that card only has the OpenCL result recorded, but they confirm that the GTX 1660 is a well-rounded performer across multiple APIs and workloads.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every specification field. The GTX 1660 has a base clock of 1530 MHz and a boost clock of 1785 MHz, while the FirePro M6100 lists no base or boost clock in the database. Memory clocks also differ: the GTX 1660 runs at 2001 MHz with 8 Gbps effective speed, while the FirePro M6100 runs at 1500 MHz with 6 Gbps effective speed.

The memory subsystem is a major differentiator. The GTX 1660 has 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus, achieving 192.1 GB/s. The FirePro M6100 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, achieving 96.00 GB/s. The NVIDIA card has triple the capacity and double the bandwidth.

The compute units also diverge. The GTX 1660 has 1,408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The FirePro M6100 has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The GTX 1660's FP32 throughput is 5.027 TFLOPS, and its FP16 throughput is 10.05 TFLOPS (2:1). The FirePro M6100's FP32 is 1.971 TFLOPS, with no FP16 figure listed.

Physical specifications are equally different. The FirePro M6100 is an MXM Module with no power connectors and a bus interface of MXM-B (3.0). The GTX 1660 is a dual-slot card with one 8-pin power connector, a suggested PSU of 300 W, and a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface. The GTX 1660 measures 229 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 35 mm in width. The FirePro M6100 has no dimensions listed, as it is a portable device module. The GTX 1660 has a TDP of 120 W, while the FirePro M6100 has no TDP listed.

Display outputs also differ. The GTX 1660 offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a. The FirePro M6100's outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," meaning they vary by laptop implementation.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial. The FirePro M6100 uses AMD's GCN 2.0 architecture on the Emerald chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The chip contains 2,080 million transistors on a 160 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 13.0M per mm². The GTX 1660 uses NVIDIA's Turing architecture on the TU116 chip, fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. The chip contains 6,600 million transistors on a 284 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 23.2M per mm².

The GTX 1660 is a newer design by five years, released on March 13, 2019, versus the FirePro M6100's May 26, 2014 release. That age difference is visible in the feature sets. The GTX 1660 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The FirePro M6100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA card also has a higher FP16 throughput of 10.05 TFLOPS (2:1), which indicates a more flexible compute pipeline for mixed-precision workloads.

Neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores, so that is not a differentiator. The GTX 1660's Turing architecture is a consumer-focused design, while GCN 2.0 was AMD's compute-oriented architecture for both gaming and professional workloads. The FirePro M6100's predecessor is FirePro Mobility, and its successor is Radeon Pro Mobile, which shows it belongs to a professional mobile line. The GTX 1660's predecessor is GeForce 10, and its successor is GeForce 20, placing it in the consumer desktop lineup.

The transistor counts tell the efficiency story. The GTX 1660 packs 6,600 million transistors into 284 mm², while the FirePro M6100 fits 2,080 million into 160 mm². The newer 12 nm process allows for a much higher transistor density, which explains why the GTX 1660 delivers more than 2.5 times the FP32 performance despite having a die that is not quite double the size.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear separation of use cases. The GTX 1660 is the choice for anyone prioritizing raw performance. Its OpenCL score is 72.1% higher than the FirePro M6100's, and its specifications dominate across the board: more shading units, more TMUs, more ROPs, more memory, higher clocks, and higher bandwidth. The GTX 1660 sits at the 51st percentile of all GPUs, and its average benchmark score of 11,680 puts it in the same class as the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT and the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT. It is an end-of-life product, but its performance profile remains competitive with much newer cards.

The FirePro M6100 is a different proposition. Its 54th percentile ranking and average score of 13,354 place it in a tight cluster of mobile AMD GPUs from the same era. It is not a performance leader, but it is a mobile module with no power connectors, designed for laptops where space and power draw are constrained. Its 2 GB of memory and 96.00 GB/s bandwidth are modest by modern standards, but they are appropriate for a professional mobile workstation card from 2014.

The choice between these two depends entirely on the context of use. In a desktop system with access to a 300 W PSU and a PCIe 3.0 slot, the GTX 1660 is the obvious pick. It delivers over three times the OpenCL performance, double the memory bandwidth, and a full suite of modern API support. In a portable workstation where the MXM form factor is required, the FirePro M6100 is the only one of the two that fits. The database does not record a scenario where the FirePro wins on performance, so its value lies entirely in its mobile form factor and professional lineage. For desktop compute workloads, the GTX 1660 wins without qualification.