AMD FirePro W600 vs NVIDIA T600 Comparison

The Verdict

The NVIDIA T600 is the clear performance leader in this comparison. The recorded benchmark data shows a single shared test, Geekbench OpenCL, where the T600 scores 27875 against 6223 for the AMD FirePro W600, a 347.9% advantage. The T600 also holds a higher overall percentile rank at 39 versus 36 for the FirePro W600. For any workload that relies on OpenCL compute, the T600 is the only defensible choice based on this data.

The AMD FirePro W600, however, is not without its own rationale. It offers six mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs compared to four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a on the T600. For a multi-display setup requiring six simultaneous outputs, the FirePro W600 has a physical connectivity advantage that no benchmark score can override. The T600 cannot drive six displays natively; the FirePro W600 can.

The decision hinges on the workload. If the task is compute-heavy and OpenCL-based, the T600 wins decisively. If the task is driving a large array of displays with modest compute demands, the FirePro W600 is the appropriate selection. There is no scenario in the data where the FirePro W600 wins on raw performance. The T600 also has a lower TDP at 40 W versus 75 W, and a lower suggested PSU rating at 200 W versus 250 W, making it the more power-efficient option in every measurable way.

Where Each One Wins

The T600 wins in every performance metric recorded in the database. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 27875 is more than four times the FirePro W600's 6223. The T600 also has a broader benchmark footprint: the database includes nine benchmark results for the T600 (Geekbench OpenCL, Geekbench Vulkan, Passmark DirectX 10, 11, 12, 9, G2D, G3D, and GPU Compute), while the FirePro W600 has only one recorded benchmark result. This broader coverage means the T600 is a more versatile performer across different API generations and workload types.

The FirePro W600 wins in display output count. Its six mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs exceed the T600's four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. This is a hardware capability, not a performance metric, but it is a legitimate advantage for specific use cases such as digital signage, trading floor setups, or any environment requiring more than four independent display outputs. The FirePro W600 also has a shorter physical length at 168 mm (6.6 inches) versus the T600's unspecified length, which could matter in space-constrained chassis.

The T600 wins on memory bandwidth decisively: 160.0 GB/s versus 64.00 GB/s. This directly impacts compute performance, especially in memory-bound OpenCL kernels. The T600 also has a larger memory pool at 4 GB versus 2 GB, which matters for larger datasets that cannot fit within a 2 GB frame buffer.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA T600 uses the TU117 chip built on the Turing architecture, fabricated at TSMC on a 12 nm process. It integrates 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 23.5M per mm². The FirePro W600 uses the Cape Verde chip with GCN 1.0 architecture, also fabricated at TSMC but on a 28 nm process. It packs 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, for a density of 12.2M per mm². The T600's newer process node and higher transistor density are consistent with its significantly higher compute output.

The T600 has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The FirePro W600 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. These differences directly explain the fill rate gap: the T600 achieves 42.72 GPixel/s pixel rate and 53.40 GTexel/s texture rate, versus 12.00 GPixel/s and 24.00 GTexel/s for the FirePro W600. The T600's pixel rate is 3.56 times higher, and its texture rate is 2.225 times higher.

Memory architecture differs substantially. The T600 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth, with memory clocked at 1250 MHz and 10 Gbps effective. The FirePro W600 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth, with memory at 1000 MHz and 4 Gbps effective. Same bus width, but the T600 achieves 2.5 times the bandwidth due to faster memory technology.

Compute capability also diverges. The T600 delivers 1.709 TFLOPS FP32 and 3.418 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio). The FirePro W600 delivers 768.0 GFLOPS FP32 and has no recorded FP16 capability. The T600's FP32 output is 2.22 times higher. API support favors the T600: DirectX 12 (12_1) versus 12 (11_1), Vulkan 1.4 versus 1.2.170, both OpenGL 4.6. The T600 also has a newer release date, April 2021, versus June 2012 for the FirePro W600. Both are end-of-life, and both are single-slot cards with no power connectors.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA T600 scores 27875 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 347.9% higher than the AMD FirePro W600's 6223.

Q: Can the AMD FirePro W600 drive more displays than the NVIDIA T600?

A: Yes. The FirePro W600 has six mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, while the T600 has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Q: Which card has more memory and bandwidth?

A: The T600 has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro W600 has 2 GB of GDDR5 with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the NVIDIA T600 support newer graphics APIs?

A: Yes. The T600 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the FirePro W600 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Q: Which card consumes less power?

A: The T600 has a TDP of 40 W and a suggested PSU of 200 W. The FirePro W600 has a TDP of 75 W and a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Q: What is the release date difference?

A: The NVIDIA T600 was released in April 2021. The AMD FirePro W600 was released in June 2012. Both are end-of-life products.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one shared benchmark between these two cards: Geekbench OpenCL. The NVIDIA T600 scores 27875, and the AMD FirePro W600 scores 6223. The T600 wins by 347.9%. This is not a marginal victory; it is a dominant one. The T600's score is 4.48 times higher than the FirePro W600's score.

To put this in perspective, consider the nearest rivals for each card. The T600's nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M (avg score 7023, delta 0.2%), AMD Radeon R5 M240 (6975, 0.9%), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M (6946, 1.3%), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 (7157, -1.7%). The T600's average benchmark score is 7035, placing it in that performance band. The FirePro W600's nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon HD 6950 (6210, 0.2%), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 (6270, -0.7%), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER (6270, -0.7%), and NVIDIA Quadro K620 (6282, -0.9%). The FirePro's average score is 6223.

The delta between the two cards in the head-to-head test (347.9%) is far larger than any delta between a card and its nearest rivals (all under 2%). This means the T600 and FirePro W600 are not in the same performance class. The T600 competes with mobile GeForce parts from the GTX 600/900 era, while the FirePro W600 competes with the Radeon HD 6950 and low-end Quadro parts.

The T600 also has additional benchmark data that the FirePro W600 lacks entirely. In Passmark tests, the T600 scores 114 in DirectX 9, 32 in DirectX 10, 49 in DirectX 11, 25 in DirectX 12, 756 in G2D, 6479 in G3D, and 2402 in GPU Compute. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 25580. None of these tests have a FirePro W600 counterpart in the database, so no direct comparison is possible for those workloads. However, the T600's G3D score of 6479 and its average benchmark score of 7035 indicate a consistent level of performance across multiple test methodologies.

The only head-to-head data point is enough to establish the hierarchy: the T600 is the faster card by a wide margin in OpenCL compute, and the FirePro W600's sole recorded benchmark places it far below. The T600's percentile rank of 39 versus 36 for the FirePro W600 further confirms this ordering, though the percentile gap is modest compared to the raw benchmark gap.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every technical specification. The NVIDIA T600 uses the TU117 chip on a 12 nm TSMC process, with 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die (23.5M per mm² density). The AMD FirePro W600 uses the Cape Verde chip on a 28 nm TSMC process, with 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die (12.2M per mm² density).

Clock behavior differs: the T600 has a base clock of 735 MHz and a boost clock of 1335 MHz. The FirePro W600 has no recorded base or boost clock in the database. Memory clocks: the T600 runs at 1250 MHz with 10 Gbps effective, while the FirePro W600 runs at 1000 MHz with 4 Gbps effective.

Memory configuration: T600 has 4 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. FirePro W600 has 2 GB GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute units: T600 has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, 32 ROPs. FirePro W600 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs. Neither has RT cores or tensor cores.

Rates: T600 achieves 42.72 GPixel/s pixel rate, 53.40 GTexel/s texture rate, 1.709 TFLOPS FP32, 3.418 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). FirePro W600 achieves 12.00 GPixel/s, 24.00 GTexel/s, 768.0 GFLOPS FP32, no FP16 data.

Power and physical: T600 has 40 W TDP, single-slot, no power connectors, 200 W suggested PSU. FirePro W600 has 75 W TDP, single-slot, no power connectors, 250 W suggested PSU. The FirePro W600 has recorded dimensions of 168 mm length, 111 mm height, 20 mm width; the T600 has no recorded dimensions.

Outputs: T600 has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. FirePro W600 has six mini-DisplayPort 1.2.

APIs: T600 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4. FirePro W600 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.2.170.

Both use PCIe 3.0 x16. Both are end-of-life. The T600's generation is "Quadro Turing (Tx000)" and its predecessor/successor are Quadro Volta and Workstation Ampere. The FirePro W600's generation is "FirePro GCN (Wx000)" with predecessor FirePro Terascale and successor Radeon Pro Polaris. The FirePro W600 has a launch MSRP of 599 USD; the T600 has no recorded launch MSRP.