AMD FirePro W600 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records only one direct benchmark comparison between these two cards, which is the Geekbench OpenCL test. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 scores 9,315, while the AMD FirePro W600 scores 6,223. That places the GTX 750 ahead by 49.7%, a decisive margin in raw compute throughput. The delta is substantial enough that the FirePro W600 would need a significant architectural advantage elsewhere to close the gap, and the recorded data does not show one.

Looking at the broader average benchmark scores, the GTX 750 posts an average of 7,222 across all recorded tests, while the FirePro W600 averages 6,223. That difference of roughly 999 points, or approximately 16.1%, is consistent with the single OpenCL result. The GTX 750 also holds a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs in the database, sitting at the 40th percentile, whereas the FirePro W600 sits at the 36th percentile. These percentile figures are not huge separations, but they do indicate that the GTX 750 lands slightly higher in the overall distribution of recorded GPU performance.

The nearest rivals for the GTX 750 help contextualize its average score. The AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile averages 7,203, which is only 0.3% behind the GTX 750. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE averages 7,171, 0.7% behind. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 also averages 7,170, again 0.7% behind. Interestingly, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 averages 7,157, which is 0.9% behind the GTX 750 in this database, despite that card generally being considered a far more powerful product. This suggests the benchmark set used here may weight certain workloads that favor the GTX 750.

For the FirePro W600, the nearest rivals show a tighter cluster. The AMD Radeon HD 6950 averages 6,210, just 0.2% behind. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 averages 6,270, which is 0.7% ahead of the FirePro W600. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER also averages 6,270, again 0.7% ahead. The NVIDIA Quadro K620 averages 6,282, 0.9% ahead. These numbers indicate that the FirePro W600 sits in a performance band where even modern high-end cards can record similar average scores under the specific tests used in this database, likely due to driver or workload characteristics rather than raw gaming capability.

The head-to-head record shows one win for the GTX 750 and zero for the FirePro W600. That is a clean sweep, but it is based on a single test. The OpenCL score is the only test where both cards have recorded data, so any conclusion must be tempered by the limited scope. Still, the margin is large enough that even if additional tests existed, the GTX 750 would likely maintain an advantage in compute-oriented workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 scores 9,315, which is 49.7% higher than the AMD FirePro W600's 6,223.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The GTX 750 averages 7,222 across all recorded tests, while the FirePro W600 averages 6,223, a difference of approximately 16.1%.

Q: What percentile rank does each card hold?

A: The GTX 750 sits at the 40th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the FirePro W600 sits at the 36th percentile.

Q: Which card has more memory?

A: The AMD FirePro W600 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, double the 1,024 MB (1 GB) of the GTX 750.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The GTX 750 has a bandwidth of 80.19 GB/s, while the FirePro W600 has 64.00 GB/s. The GTX 750 is ahead by about 25.3%.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel rate?

A: The GTX 750 delivers 17.36 GPixel/s, compared to 12.00 GPixel/s for the FirePro W600, a 44.7% advantage.

The Verdict

The data points to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 as the stronger performer in compute benchmarks. Its OpenCL score of 9,315 is nearly 50% higher than the FirePro W600's 6,223, and its average benchmark score of 7,222 exceeds 6,223 by a clear margin. The GTX 750 also wins in pixel rate, texture rate, and memory bandwidth, which are all measurable from the recorded specifications.

However, the FirePro W600 is not without its own merits. It offers 2 GB of memory, which is double the GTX 750's 1 GB. For workloads that are memory-capacity bound rather than compute-bound, that extra capacity could matter. The FirePro W600 also supports six mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, which makes it a specialized tool for multi-display professional setups. The GTX 750, by contrast, offers two DVI outputs and one mini-HDMI 1.4a port.

For a user choosing purely on benchmark performance, the GTX 750 is the clear pick. The recorded data shows no test where the FirePro W600 wins. For a user who needs many simultaneous display outputs or twice the memory capacity, the FirePro W600 becomes the practical choice despite its lower compute scores. The verdict depends on whether the workload is compute-heavy or display-heavy.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in several key specification fields. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 has a base clock of 1,020 MHz and a boost clock of 1,085 MHz, while the AMD FirePro W600 has no recorded base or boost clock in the database. The GTX 750's memory operates at 1,253 MHz, with 5 Gbps effective, while the FirePro W600's memory operates at 1,000 MHz, with 4 Gbps effective.

Memory size differs: the GTX 750 has 1,024 MB, and the FirePro W600 has 2 GB. Both use GDDR5 and a 128-bit bus, but bandwidth differs, with the GTX 750 at 80.19 GB/s and the FirePro W600 at 64.00 GB/s. Pixel rate is 17.36 GPixel/s for the GTX 750 versus 12.00 GPixel/s for the FirePro W600. Texture rate is 34.72 GTexel/s versus 24.00 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 1,111.0 GFLOPS versus 768.0 GFLOPS.

The GTX 750 has a TDP of 55 W, while the FirePro W600 has a TDP of 75 W. Both are single-slot and require no power connectors, and both suggest a 250 W power supply. The GTX 750 measures 145 mm (5.7 inches) in length, while the FirePro W600 measures 168 mm (6.6 inches) in length, with additional dimensions of 111 mm (4.4 inches) height and 20 mm (0.8 inches) width.

Display outputs differ significantly: the GTX 750 offers 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.4a, while the FirePro W600 offers 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2. The GTX 750 was released on 2014-02-17, and the FirePro W600 on 2012-06-12. The GTX 750 has a launch MSRP of 119 USD, while the FirePro W600 has a launch MSRP of 599 USD.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 is built on the GM107 chip using the Maxwell architecture, part of the GeForce 700 generation. The AMD FirePro W600 uses the Cape Verde chip with GCN 1.0 architecture, part of the FirePro GCN (Wx000) generation. Both are manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but their transistor counts differ. The GTX 750 has 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.6M per mm². The FirePro W600 has 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, giving a density of 12.2M per mm².

Both cards have 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. Neither has ray tracing cores or tensor cores. The GTX 750 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The FirePro W600 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Vulkan version difference is notable, with the GTX 750 supporting a newer revision.

The GTX 750's predecessor is the GeForce 600 series, and its successor is the GeForce 900 series. The FirePro W600's predecessor is FirePro Terascale, and its successor is Radeon Pro Polaris. Both cards are marked as end-of-life in production status. The GTX 750 uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 bus interface, as does the FirePro W600.

The architectural differences are meaningful. Maxwell is a newer design than GCN 1.0, and the recorded benchmark data suggests that newer architecture translates to better compute efficiency. The GTX 750 achieves higher pixel, texture, and FP32 rates despite having the same shading unit and TMU counts. That points to better per-clock execution, which is a hallmark of the Maxwell architecture.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 wins in every recorded benchmark category. Its OpenCL score of 9,315 beats the FirePro W600's 6,223 by 49.7%. Its pixel rate of 17.36 GPixel/s beats 12.00 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 34.72 GTexel/s beats 24.00 GTexel/s. Its FP32 output of 1,111.0 GFLOPS beats 768.0 GFLOPS. Its memory bandwidth of 80.19 GB/s beats 64.00 GB/s. For any compute-oriented workload, the GTX 750 is the superior choice according to the recorded data.

The AMD FirePro W600 wins in memory capacity, with 2 GB versus 1 GB. For workloads that require holding larger datasets in GPU memory, this is an advantage. The FirePro W600 also wins in display connectivity, offering 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs versus the GTX 750's 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI. For multi-monitor professional setups, the FirePro W600 is clearly better suited.

The GTX 750 has a lower TDP at 55 W versus 75 W, meaning it draws less power. It also supports a newer Vulkan version, 1.4 versus 1.2.170. The GTX 750 is shorter at 145 mm versus 168 mm, which may matter for small form factor cases.

In summary, the GTX 750 is the benchmark winner across the board, and it also consumes less power and supports newer API revisions. The FirePro W600 is the choice when memory capacity or display output count is the priority. The data does not show any scenario where the FirePro W600 outperforms the GTX 750 in raw compute, but its specialized features make it a valid alternative for specific professional use cases.