AMD FirePro M6100 vs NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile Comparison

The Verdict

The data set presents a decisive outcome: the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile outperforms the AMD FirePro M6100 in every measurable benchmark category where both have results, and the single head-to-head comparison shows a 323.2% advantage for the NVIDIA part. The RTX A2000 Mobile is the clear choice for any workload requiring raw compute throughput, modern API support, or higher memory bandwidth. The FirePro M6100, while an older design, holds a 54th percentile rank among all GPUs, meaning it is not obsolete for basic tasks, but its performance ceiling is far lower.

For users prioritizing compute-heavy applications like OpenCL acceleration, the RTX A2000 Mobile is the only rational pick. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 56,518 versus the FirePro’s 13,354 is not a marginal gap; it is a generational leap. The RTX A2000 Mobile also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, while the FirePro tops out at DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170, making the NVIDIA part more future-proof for modern software. The FirePro M6100 might still serve in legacy environments or where its MXM-B (3.0) form factor is required, but from a pure performance-per-dollar or capability standpoint, the RTX A2000 Mobile wins outright.

The RTX A2000 Mobile’s 55th percentile rank places it just above the FirePro’s 54th percentile, but the average benchmark score difference is stark: 13,821 versus 13,354. This small percentile gap is misleading, as the head-to-head result reveals a 323.2% delta, which is far more representative of their true performance separation. The verdict is simple: choose the RTX A2000 Mobile for any modern workload, and only consider the FirePro M6100 if hardware compatibility or legacy driver requirements dictate otherwise.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile achieves 8.637 TFLOPS FP32, while the AMD FirePro M6100 delivers 1.971 TFLOPS FP32. This is a 4.4x raw difference, confirmed by the 323.2% Geekbench OpenCL delta.

Q: Are these GPUs comparable in terms of memory bandwidth?

A: No. The RTX A2000 Mobile offers 192.0 GB/s with 4 GB GDDR6, whereas the FirePro M6100 provides 96.00 GB/s with 2 GB GDDR5. The NVIDIA part has double the bandwidth and double the memory capacity.

Q: Which GPU supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The RTX A2000 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4. The FirePro M6100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA part is ahead on both fronts.

Q: What is the transistor count difference?

A: The RTX A2000 Mobile has 8,700 million transistors on an 8 nm Samsung process, while the FirePro M6100 has 2,080 million on a 28 nm TSMC process. The density difference is 43.5M/mm² versus 13.0M/mm².

Q: Does the FirePro M6100 have any unique features?

A: The FirePro M6100 uses an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface and comes as an MXM Module, whereas the RTX A2000 Mobile is an IGP with PCIe 4.0 x16. This makes the FirePro potentially more serviceable in specific laptop designs.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The RTX A2000 Mobile has 2,560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The FirePro M6100 has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The NVIDIA part leads in every count.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is massive. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile is built on the Ampere architecture using the GA107 chip, fabricated on Samsung’s 8 nm process. The AMD FirePro M6100 uses the GCN 2.0 architecture with the Emerald chip, produced on TSMC’s 28 nm node. This process gap alone explains much of the performance delta, as the RTX A2000 Mobile packs 8,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, yielding a density of 43.5 million transistors per square millimeter. The FirePro M6100, by contrast, houses 2,080 million transistors on a 160 mm² die, for a density of just 13.0 million per square millimeter.

The RTX A2000 Mobile is a modern design with dedicated hardware for ray tracing and tensor operations. It includes 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores, features entirely absent from the FirePro M6100, which lists no RT or tensor core counts. This makes the NVIDIA part capable of hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads, while the FirePro relies on traditional shader compute only. The RTX A2000 Mobile also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, both at 8.637 TFLOPS, whereas the FirePro M6100 has no listed FP16 capability, indicating a lack of hardware support for half-precision acceleration.

The API support further distinguishes them. The RTX A2000 Mobile reaches DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The FirePro M6100 stops at DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. This means the NVIDIA part is ready for the latest gaming and compute APIs, while the AMD part is limited to older feature levels. The production status for both is end-of-life, but the RTX A2000 Mobile is a far more recent design, released in 2021 versus 2014 for the FirePro. The NVIDIA part’s predecessor is Quadro Turing-M, while the FirePro’s predecessor is FirePro Mobility, showing two entirely different evolutionary paths.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every specification field. The RTX A2000 Mobile has a base clock of 1215 MHz and a boost clock of 1687 MHz, while the FirePro M6100 lists no base or boost clocks at all. Memory clocks are identical at 1500 MHz, but the effective data rate differs: the RTX A2000 Mobile runs at 12 Gbps effective, versus 6 Gbps for the FirePro. Memory capacity is 4 GB versus 2 GB, with the RTX A2000 Mobile using GDDR6 and the FirePro using GDDR5. Bus widths are the same at 128 bit, but the resulting bandwidth is 192.0 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s.

Compute resource counts are heavily skewed toward the NVIDIA part. The RTX A2000 Mobile has 2,560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, while the FirePro M6100 has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Pixel rate is 80.98 GPixel/s versus 17.60 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 135.0 GTexel/s versus 61.60 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 8.637 TFLOPS versus 1.971 TFLOPS. The RTX A2000 Mobile has a TDP of 95 W, while the FirePro M6100 has no TDP listed.

Form factors also diverge: the RTX A2000 Mobile is an IGP with a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, while the FirePro M6100 is an MXM Module with an MXM-B (3.0) interface. Both have no power connectors and use portable-device-dependent display outputs. The RTX A2000 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, while the FirePro supports DirectX 12 (12_0). The RTX A2000 Mobile also has a higher transistor count, a newer process node, and a release date in 2021 versus 2014. The FirePro M6100’s successor is Radeon Pro Mobile, while the RTX A2000 Mobile’s successor is Ada-MW, indicating the NVIDIA part is one generation behind the current lineup.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is a landslide. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile scores 56,518, while the AMD FirePro M6100 scores 13,354. The delta is 323.2% in favor of the NVIDIA part. This is not a close contest; the RTX A2000 Mobile delivers more than four times the OpenCL compute throughput. The FirePro M6100’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 5500M (avg score 13,356) and AMD Radeon HD 8950M (13,376), both within 0.2% of its score, confirming that the FirePro sits in a performance tier roughly equivalent to low-end mobile GPUs from later years.

The RTX A2000 Mobile, by contrast, sits among much faster company in its rival list. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon 660M (avg score 13,812, 0.1% delta) and the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT (13,745, 0.6% delta). The presence of a high-end desktop GPU like the RX 7900 XT in its rival list, with a score within 0.6% of the RTX A2000 Mobile’s average, underscores the NVIDIA part’s strong standing. The average benchmark score for the RTX A2000 Mobile is 13,821, while the FirePro’s average is 13,354. Even in the aggregate, the RTX A2000 Mobile is ahead by 3.5%, but the head-to-head OpenCL result shows the true extent of the performance gap.

The RTX A2000 Mobile also has a richer benchmark suite: it has scores for Passmark DirectX 10 (57), DirectX 11 (68), DirectX 12 (47), DirectX 9 (115), G2D (491), G3D (9,611), and GPU Compute (4,334). The FirePro M6100 only has the Geekbench OpenCL score. This means the RTX A2000 Mobile’s performance profile is well-characterized across multiple API levels, while the FirePro’s is effectively unknown outside of OpenCL. The wins tally is 1 for the RTX A2000 Mobile and 0 for the FirePro M6100, making the outcome unambiguous.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A2000 Mobile wins in every domain where data exists. In compute-heavy applications using OpenCL, it is 323.2% faster than the FirePro M6100. This makes it the superior choice for GPU-accelerated rendering, scientific simulation, machine learning inference, and any workload that leverages the FP32 throughput of 8.637 TFLOPS. Its 4 GB GDDR6 memory with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth also gives it a substantial edge in memory-bound tasks, such as large texture sets or high-resolution compute buffers. The presence of 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores further extends its utility to ray-traced graphics and AI-based features, which the FirePro cannot handle in hardware.

The RTX A2000 Mobile also wins on API compatibility. With DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, it can run the newest games and applications that require these modern APIs. The FirePro M6100, limited to DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170, will be locked out of some newer titles or features. The NVIDIA part’s PCIe 4.0 x16 interface also ensures higher bandwidth to the host system, assuming the laptop supports it, while the FirePro’s MXM-B (3.0) is an older standard.

The FirePro M6100 does have one niche advantage: its MXM Module form factor. In laptops designed for MXM upgrades, the FirePro could be a drop-in replacement, whereas the RTX A2000 Mobile is an IGP, meaning it is soldered to the motherboard and cannot be swapped. For users with a compatible MXM chassis, the FirePro might be the only option if a socketed GPU is required. Its lower transistor count and older process also mean it likely generates less heat, though no TDP is listed to confirm this. Its 54th percentile ranking shows it is not useless; it can handle basic 2D and legacy 3D workloads, as evidenced by its OpenCL score being in the same ballpark as the AMD Radeon Pro 555X (13,321) and AMD Radeon Pro 555 (13,407).

In summary, the RTX A2000 Mobile is the winner for any performance-oriented task, while the FirePro M6100 is only relevant for specific hardware compatibility scenarios or legacy software environments that do not benefit from the NVIDIA part’s modern feature set. The data does not support any other conclusion.