AMD FirePro M6100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains a single direct comparison between the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 and the AMD FirePro M6100, using the Geekbench OpenCL workload. In this test, the GTX 580 scores 15,283 points, while the FirePro M6100 scores 13,354 points. The delta between them is 14.4%, with the NVIDIA part taking the win. That is a substantial margin for a single benchmark, and it places the two cards in different performance tiers despite both being end-of-life products.

Looking at the broader context, the GTX 580’s score of 15,283 puts it at the 58th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals are remarkably close: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 scores 15,290 (a 0% delta), the AMD Radeon 680M scores 15,270 (0.1% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM scores 15,199 (0.6% behind), and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 scores 15,171 (0.7% behind). The GTX 580 is essentially neck-and-neck with these modern parts in OpenCL compute, which is striking for a card that predates them by years. The data implies that raw compute throughput, not architectural novelty, is what drives this particular score.

The FirePro M6100, meanwhile, scores 13,354 and sits at the 54th percentile. Its nearest rivals cluster tightly as well: the AMD Radeon RX 5500M scores 13,356 (a 0% delta), the AMD Radeon HD 8950M scores 13,376 (0.2% ahead of the M6100), the AMD Radeon Pro 555X scores 13,321 (0.3% behind), and the AMD Radeon Pro 555 scores 13,407 (0.4% ahead). The M6100 is squarely in the middle of a group of mobile and professional AMD parts, all within a fraction of a percent of each other. This suggests that the M6100’s OpenCL performance is representative of a specific class of mobile workstation GPUs, neither a standout nor a laggard within that group.

The 14.4% gap between the GTX 580 and the M6100 is not a near-miss; it is a clear, consistent advantage for the desktop card. In terms of absolute scores, the GTX 580’s 15,283 versus the M6100’s 13,354 means the former delivers roughly 1,929 additional points. That is a meaningful difference, and it aligns with the hardware specifications: the GTX 580 has a 384-bit memory bus and 192.4 GB/s of bandwidth, while the M6100 has a 128-bit bus and 96.00 GB/s. Memory bandwidth is often a bottleneck in OpenCL workloads, and the GTX 580 has exactly double the bandwidth. The data does not isolate the cause, but the correlation is strong.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded measurements, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 is the faster card in OpenCL compute. Its score of 15,283 beats the AMD FirePro M6100’s 13,354 by 14.4%, and that is the only benchmark result in the database for this pairing. If the question is simply which GPU delivers more compute performance, the answer is unambiguous: the GTX 580.

However, the FirePro M6100 is a mobile workstation part, while the GTX 580 is a desktop enthusiast card from an earlier era. The M6100 uses an MXM module form factor, draws no external power connectors, and is designed for portable devices. The GTX 580 is a dual-slot card that requires a 550 W power supply and a 6-pin plus 8-pin connector. The choice between them is not purely about score. For a laptop or compact workstation where the M6100 fits, it is the only option of the two. For a desktop build where space and power are available, the GTX 580 offers the higher score.

The percentile data reinforces this: the GTX 580 ranks at the 58th percentile of all GPUs, while the M6100 ranks at the 54th. That four-percentage-point difference is modest in the grand scheme of the database, but it is consistent with the head-to-head delta. The data does not suggest that the M6100 is a poor performer; rather, it is a competent mobile part that trails the older desktop card in raw OpenCL throughput. Users who prioritize compute performance and have the physical accommodation for a desktop GPU should choose the GTX 580. Users who need a mobile form factor should choose the M6100, accepting the lower score.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 scores 15,283, which is 14.4% higher than the AMD FirePro M6100’s 13,354.

Q: How does the GTX 580 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GTX 580’s score of 15,283 is within 0.7% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (15,290), the AMD Radeon 680M (15,270), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM (15,199), and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 (15,171).

Q: How does the FirePro M6100 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The M6100’s score of 13,354 is within 0.4% of the AMD Radeon RX 5500M (13,356), the AMD Radeon HD 8950M (13,376), the AMD Radeon Pro 555X (13,321), and the AMD Radeon Pro 555 (13,407).

Q: What is the form factor difference between the two cards?

A: The GTX 580 is a dual-slot desktop card with a 267 mm length and 111 mm height, while the M6100 is an MXM Module with no specified dimensions and is dependent on the portable device for display outputs.

Q: Which card has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The GTX 580 has 192.4 GB/s of bandwidth over a 384-bit bus, while the M6100 has 96.00 GB/s over a 128-bit bus. The GTX 580’s bandwidth is exactly double.

Q: What are the release dates for these GPUs?

A: The GTX 580 was released on November 8, 2010, and the FirePro M6100 was released on May 26, 2014.

Specification Differences

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 and AMD FirePro M6100 differ in nearly every core specification. The GTX 580 has 512 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 48 raster output pipelines. The M6100 has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The GTX 580 has more TMUs and ROPs, while the M6100 has more shading units. The pixel rate of the GTX 580 is 24.70 GPixel/s, compared to 17.60 GPixel/s for the M6100. The texture rate is 49.41 GTexel/s for the GTX 580 and 61.60 GTexel/s for the M6100, meaning the M6100 is faster at texture fill. The FP32 compute is 1.581 TFLOPS for the GTX 580 and 1.971 TFLOPS for the M6100, so the M6100 claims a higher theoretical floating-point figure.

Memory specifications diverge sharply. The GTX 580 has 1536 MB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus with 192.4 GB/s bandwidth. The M6100 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s. The memory clock is 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective) for the GTX 580 and 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) for the M6100. The GTX 580’s wider bus compensates for its lower clock, yielding the higher bandwidth. The M6100 has more memory capacity, which could matter for larger datasets, but the GTX 580 has the bandwidth advantage.

The GTX 580 has a TDP of 244 W, a dual-slot width, and requires a 550 W power supply with a 6-pin and 8-pin connector. The M6100 has no listed TDP, uses an MXM Module slot width, and requires no power connectors. The bus interface is PCIe 2.0 x16 for the GTX 580 and MXM-B (3.0) for the M6100. Display outputs are 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a for the GTX 580, while the M6100’s outputs are portable device dependent. The GTX 580 is 267 mm long and 111 mm tall; the M6100 has no listed dimensions.

Architecture Differences

The GTX 580 is built on NVIDIA’s Fermi 2.0 architecture, using the GF110 chip, and fabricated on a 40 nm process at TSMC. It contains 3,000 million transistors on a 520 mm² die, with a transistor density of 5.8 million per mm². The M6100 uses AMD’s GCN 2.0 architecture, with the Emerald chip, on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 2,080 million transistors on a 160 mm² die, with a transistor density of 13.0 million per mm². The M6100’s process node is more advanced, allowing a much higher transistor density despite the smaller die. The GTX 580’s die is over three times larger, but the M6100 packs more transistors per area.

The memory type is GDDR5 for both, but the bus widths and capacities differ as noted. The GTX 580 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and no Vulkan. The M6100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Vulkan support is a meaningful difference: the M6100 can run modern Vulkan applications, while the GTX 580 has no Vulkan support in the database. Neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores. The GTX 580’s generation is GeForce 500, with a predecessor of GeForce 400 and a successor of GeForce 600. The M6100’s generation is FirePro Mobile (Mx100), with a predecessor of FirePro Mobility and a successor of Radeon Pro Mobile. The GTX 580 has a launch MSRP of 499 USD, which is stated once here for reference.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 580 wins the only recorded benchmark, the Geekbench OpenCL test, with a 14.4% higher score. It also wins on memory bandwidth (192.4 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s), pixel rate (24.70 GPixel/s versus 17.60 GPixel/s), and ROP count (48 versus 16). The GTX 580 is the better choice for workloads that are sensitive to memory bandwidth and pixel throughput, such as high-resolution rendering or heavy texture sampling. Its 384-bit bus is a clear advantage in data-intensive compute tasks.

The M6100 wins on shading unit count (896 versus 512), texture rate (61.60 GTexel/s versus 49.41 GTexel/s), FP32 throughput (1.971 TFLOPS versus 1.581 TFLOPS), and memory capacity (2 GB versus 1536 MB). It also has a more advanced process node and supports Vulkan, which the GTX 580 lacks. The M6100 is the better choice for applications that leverage high shader counts or that require Vulkan compatibility, and its larger memory pool could hold bigger working sets. Its texture rate advantage suggests it may handle certain texturing workloads better, despite the lower overall OpenCL score.

The M6100’s mobile form factor is another clear win: it is an MXM module with no power connectors, making it suitable for laptops and compact systems. The GTX 580 cannot fit in such environments. For a user with a portable workstation, the M6100 is the only viable option, and its compute performance, while lower, is still respectable at the 54th percentile. For a desktop user with power and space to spare, the GTX 580’s higher score and bandwidth make it the stronger performer. The data shows a split: compute-heavy desktop workloads favor the GTX 580, while mobile or Vulkan-based workloads favor the M6100.