ATI Radeon 8500 vs FirePro M6100

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro M6100 with Radeon 8500, including specs and performance data.

FirePro M6100
2014
2 GB GDDR5
5.69
+28350%

M6100 outperforms ATI 8500 by a whopping 28350% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking5971492
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data0.06
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Rage 7 (2001−2006)
GPU code nameEmeraldR200
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date27 May 2014 (10 years ago)14 August 2001 (23 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores896no data
Core clock speed1100 MHz275 MHz
Number of transistors2,080 million60 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data23 Watt
Texture fill rate61.602.200
Floating-point processing power1.971 TFLOPSno data
ROPs164
TMUs568

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)AGP 4x
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5DDR
Maximum RAM amount2 GB64 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz275 MHz
Memory bandwidth96 GB/s8.8 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsPortable Device Dependent1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (12_0)8.1
Shader Model6.5 (6.0)no data
OpenGL4.61.4
OpenCL2.1N/A
Vulkan1.2.170N/A

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

FirePro M6100 5.69
+28350%
ATI 8500 0.02

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

FirePro M6100 2194
+36467%
ATI 8500 6

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD49-0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 9−10 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7 0−1
Battlefield 5 14−16 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10 0−1
Far Cry 5 12−14 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 35−40 0−1
Hitman 3 12−14 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40 0−1
Metro Exodus 14−16 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7 0−1
Battlefield 5 14−16 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10 0−1
Far Cry 5 12−14 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 35−40 0−1
Hitman 3 12−14 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40 0−1
Metro Exodus 14−16 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10 0−1
Far Cry 5 12−14 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 35−40 0−1
Hitman 3 12−14 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50 0−1

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Far Cry 5 6−7 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 14−16 0−1
Hitman 3 10−11 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14 0−1
Metro Exodus 4−5 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11 0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5 0−1
Hitman 3 2−3 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12 0−1
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.69 0.02
Recency 27 May 2014 14 August 2001
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 64 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 150 nm

FirePro M6100 has a 28350% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 435.7% more advanced lithography process.

The FirePro M6100 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 8500 in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro M6100 is a mobile workstation card while Radeon 8500 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD FirePro M6100
FirePro M6100
ATI Radeon 8500
Radeon 8500

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.6 149 votes

Rate FirePro M6100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 94 votes

Rate Radeon 8500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.