AMD FirePro M6100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER Comparison

The AMD FirePro M6100 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER represent two very different eras of GPU design, separated by five years of architectural evolution. The data available for direct comparison is limited to a single shared benchmark, but that result is decisive. The GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER delivers a Geekbench OpenCL score of 52,490, while the FirePro M6100 scores 13,354. This translates to a 74.6% deficit for the AMD part, making the NVIDIA card the clear winner in the only head-to-head test recorded. The FirePro M6100's score places it at the 54th percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 1660 SUPER sits at the 53rd percentile, indicating that despite the massive performance gap in this test, both cards occupy similar positions in the broader landscape of historical GPU performance. The GTX 1660 SUPER's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 580 (0.4% ahead) and the NVIDIA Tesla M2090 (0.7% behind), while the FirePro M6100 trades blows with the AMD Radeon RX 5500M (0% delta) and the AMD Radeon Pro 555X (0.3% ahead).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL, and it paints a stark picture of generational performance. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER scores 52,490, compared to the AMD FirePro M6100's 13,354. The delta of -74.6% for the AMD card means it delivers less than a quarter of the NVIDIA part's compute throughput in this test. This is not a close contest; it is a categorical victory for the newer architecture. The FirePro M6100's score of 13,354 is nearly identical to its nearest rivals, the AMD Radeon RX 5500M (13,356) and AMD Radeon HD 8950M (13,376), suggesting it is performing at the expected level for its generation and class. In contrast, the GTX 1660 SUPER's score of 52,490 is roughly four times higher, which aligns with its position among rivals like the AMD Radeon RX 580 (12,928) and the AMD Radeon 740M (12,870), both of which it surpasses by a significant margin.

The benchmark results indicate that the GTX 1660 SUPER is not merely faster; it is in a different performance tier altogether. While the FirePro M6100's score places it in a cluster of mobile and older desktop parts around the 13,300-13,400 mark, the GTX 1660 SUPER's score places it among much more capable desktop GPUs. The delta of -74.6% is the single largest number in the head-to-head data, and it underscores the generational leap in compute capabilities between 2014 and 2019. There are no other shared benchmarks in the data, so this single result must carry the weight of the comparison. The FirePro M6100 records zero wins across all head-to-head tests, while the GTX 1660 SUPER records one win, reflecting the lopsided nature of the available data.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER than the AMD FirePro M6100 in the shared benchmark?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 1660 SUPER scores 52,490 against the FirePro M6100's 13,354. The delta is -74.6% for the AMD part, meaning the NVIDIA card outperforms it by nearly a factor of four.

Q: Which GPU has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The AMD FirePro M6100 sits at the 54th percentile, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER sits at the 53rd percentile. Despite the vast performance gap in the OpenCL test, the percentile rankings are nearly identical, reflecting different distributions of benchmark scores across all GPUs.

Q: What is the closest rival to the FirePro M6100 in terms of average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5500M is the closest rival with an average score of 13,356, representing a 0% delta from the FirePro M6100's 13,354. The AMD Radeon Pro 555X is also close, scoring 13,321 with a 0.3% delta.

Q: How does the GTX 1660 SUPER compare to its nearest rival, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile?

A: The GTX 1660 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 12,986, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile scores 12,940. The GTX 1660 SUPER is 0.4% ahead of the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile in average score.

Q: Does the GTX 1660 SUPER's OpenCL score exceed its average benchmark score?

A: Yes. The GTX 1660 SUPER's OpenCL score of 52,490 is significantly higher than its average benchmark score of 12,986. The average score is pulled down by other tests like Passmark G3D (12,699) and Passmark G2D (805), which use different workloads.

Q: What is the performance delta between the FirePro M6100 and the Radeon Pro 555?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 555 has an average score of 13,407, which is 0.4% higher than the FirePro M6100's 13,354. This places the FirePro M6100 slightly behind the Radeon Pro 555 in average performance.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial, reflecting five years of design evolution. The AMD FirePro M6100 is built on GCN 2.0 architecture, codenamed "Emerald," and fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 2,080 million transistors into a 160 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 13.0 million transistors per mm². In contrast, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER uses the Turing architecture with the TU116 chip, built on a 12 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains 6,600 million transistors on a 284 mm² die, achieving a density of 23.2 million transistors per mm². The GTX 1660 SUPER's die is 77.5% larger and holds more than three times the transistors, allowing for a significantly more complex design.

The compute resources differ dramatically. The FirePro M6100 has 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 raster output units (ROPs). The GTX 1660 SUPER, by comparison, has 1,408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. This equates to 57% more shading units, 57% more TMUs, and three times the ROPs for the NVIDIA part. The pixel rate tells a similar story: the FirePro M6100 achieves 17.60 GPixel/s, while the GTX 1660 SUPER reaches 85.68 GPixel/s. Texture rate also favors NVIDIA heavily, with 157.1 GTexel/s versus 61.60 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute throughput is 5.027 TFLOPS for the GTX 1660 SUPER versus 1.971 TFLOPS for the FirePro M6100, a 2.55x advantage. The GTX 1660 SUPER also supports FP16 at 10.05 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, a feature entirely absent from the FirePro M6100's specifications.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field. The process node is a fundamental difference: the FirePro M6100 uses 28 nm, while the GTX 1660 SUPER uses 12 nm. This directly impacts transistor count (2,080 million vs 6,600 million) and die size (160 mm² vs 284 mm²). The memory subsystem is also entirely different. The FirePro M6100 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 1660 SUPER has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 336.0 GB/s. The memory clock differs as well, with the FirePro M6100 running at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) and the GTX 1660 SUPER at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective).

Clock speeds are another differentiator. The FirePro M6100 has no listed base or boost clocks, while the GTX 1660 SUPER runs at a 1530 MHz base and 1785 MHz boost. Power requirements are also distinct: the GTX 1660 SUPER has a TDP of 125 W, a dual-slot form factor, and requires a single 8-pin power connector with a suggested PSU of 300 W. The FirePro M6100 uses an MXM Module slot width, has no power connectors, and is designed for portable devices. The bus interface differs, with the FirePro M6100 using MXM-B (3.0) and the GTX 1660 SUPER using PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent" for the AMD part, while the NVIDIA card offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a. The GTX 1660 SUPER also has physical dimensions of 229 mm length, 111 mm height, and 35 mm width, while the FirePro M6100 has no listed dimensions. The launch MSRP for the GTX 1660 SUPER is 229 USD; the FirePro M6100 has no listed launch MSRP. The GTX 1660 SUPER supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the FirePro M6100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER is the superior performer in every measurable aspect. The single head-to-head benchmark shows a 74.6% advantage for NVIDIA, and the architectural specifications support this dominance. With 1,408 shading units, 88 TMUs, 48 ROPs, and 336.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth, the GTX 1660 SUPER is designed for high-throughput gaming and compute workloads. Its 5.027 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 85.68 GPixel/s pixel rate place it firmly in the desktop performance segment. The GTX 1660 SUPER's average benchmark score of 12,986, while lower than its OpenCL score, still places it among capable desktop parts like the Radeon RX 580 and RTX 3050 Ti Mobile.

The AMD FirePro M6100, by contrast, is a mobile workstation part from 2014. Its 896 shading units, 2 GB of GDDR5, and 1.971 TFLOPS of FP32 performance are adequate for its era but cannot compete with the Turing-based NVIDIA card. The FirePro M6100's average score of 13,354 places it in a tight cluster with other older mobile parts like the Radeon RX 5500M and Radeon Pro 555X, all within 0.4% of each other. This indicates it performs as expected for its generation, but the generational gap is insurmountable. For users seeking maximum compute performance, the GTX 1660 SUPER is the clear choice. For those requiring a mobile MXM module with no external power connectors, the FirePro M6100 is the only option that fits that form factor. The data does not support any scenario where the FirePro M6100 outperforms the GTX 1660 SUPER in raw performance, but the form factor and power requirements are the only advantages the AMD part holds.