Quadro NVS 285 vs FirePro W600

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro W600 and Quadro NVS 285, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

FirePro W600
2012
2 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
4.33
+3836%

W600 outperforms NVS 285 by a whopping 3836% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking6731442
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.45no data
Power efficiency4.030.43
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code nameCape VerdeNV44 A2
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date13 June 2012 (12 years ago)6 June 2006 (18 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$599 $27.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores512no data
Core clock speed750 MHz275 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 million75 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm110 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate24.001.100
Floating-point processing power0.768 TFLOPSno data
ROPs162
TMUs324

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Length163 mm168 mm
Width1-slot1-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 GB128 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz250 MHz
Memory bandwidth64 GB/s8 GB/s

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 Connectors6x mini-DisplayPort1x DMS-59

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model5.13.0
OpenGL4.62.1
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan1.2.131N/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 W600 4.33
+3836%
NVS 285 0.11

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 W600 1671
+3879%
NVS 285 42

Gaming performance

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

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.33 0.11
Recency 13 June 2012 6 June 2006
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 128 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 110 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 18 Watt

FirePro W600 has a 3836.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 292.9% more advanced lithography process.

NVS 285, on the other hand, has 316.7% lower power consumption.

The FirePro W600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 285 in performance tests.


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 W600
FirePro W600
NVIDIA Quadro NVS 285
Quadro NVS 285

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.


3.7 15 votes

Rate FirePro W600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 5 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 285 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.