FirePro W2100 vs GeForce GTX 460M SLI
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 460M SLI with FirePro W2100, including specs and performance data.
GTX 460M SLI outperforms W2100 by a whopping 112% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 643 | 856 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 6.23 |
| Architecture | Fermi (2010−2014) | GCN 1.0 (2011−2020) |
| GPU code name | N11E-GS | Oland |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 3 September 2010 (14 years ago) | 12 August 2014 (10 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 cores | 384 | 320 |
| Core clock speed | 675 MHz | 630 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 680 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 950 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 26 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 13.60 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.4352 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 8 |
| TMUs | no data | 20 |
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 size | large | no data |
| Bus support | no data | PCIe 3.0 |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Form factor | no data | low profile / half length |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2x1536 MB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 192 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1250 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 28.8 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
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 Connectors | no data | 2x DisplayPort |
| DisplayPort count | no data | 2 |
| Dual-link DVI support | - | + |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| AppAcceleration | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11 | 12 (11_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | + | - |
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:
| 900p | 52
+117%
| 24−27
−117%
|
| Full HD | 63
+385%
| 13
−385%
|
| 4K | 4−5
+100%
| 2
−100%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+37.5%
|
8−9
−37.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−12
+83.3%
|
6−7
−83.3%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
+200%
|
5−6
−200%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+37.5%
|
8−9
−37.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−12
+83.3%
|
6−7
−83.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 20−22
+100%
|
10−11
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12−14
+300%
|
3−4
−300%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 14−16
+66.7%
|
9−10
−66.7%
|
| Valorant | 14−16 | 0−1 |
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
+200%
|
5−6
−200%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+37.5%
|
8−9
−37.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−12
+83.3%
|
6−7
−83.3%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+220%
|
5−6
−220%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+60%
|
14−16
−60%
|
| Fortnite | 27−30
+142%
|
12−14
−142%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 20−22
+100%
|
10−11
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+220%
|
5−6
−220%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12−14
+300%
|
3−4
−300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
+90.9%
|
21−24
−90.9%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 14−16
+66.7%
|
9−10
−66.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
+60%
|
10−11
−60%
|
| Valorant | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| World of Tanks | 80−85
+86.4%
|
40−45
−86.4%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
+200%
|
5−6
−200%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+37.5%
|
8−9
−37.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−12
+83.3%
|
6−7
−83.3%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+220%
|
5−6
−220%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+60%
|
14−16
−60%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 20−22
+100%
|
10−11
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
+90.9%
|
21−24
−90.9%
|
| Valorant | 14−16 | 0−1 |
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+106%
|
16−18
−106%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| World of Tanks | 35−40
+140%
|
14−16
−140%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
+83.3%
|
6−7
−83.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 7−8
+250%
|
2−3
−250%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
| Valorant | 14−16
+75%
|
8−9
−75%
|
4K
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+133%
|
6−7
−133%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
| Fortnite | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
This is how GTX 460M SLI and FirePro W2100 compete in popular games:
- GTX 460M SLI is 117% faster in 900p
- GTX 460M SLI is 385% faster in 1080p
- GTX 460M SLI is 100% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Forza Horizon 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 460M SLI is 900% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- GTX 460M SLI is ahead in 51 test (98%)
- there's a draw in 1 test (2%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.84 | 2.28 |
| Recency | 3 September 2010 | 12 August 2014 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 28 nm |
GTX 460M SLI has a 112.3% higher aggregate performance score.
FirePro W2100, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce GTX 460M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro W2100 in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 460M SLI is a notebook card while FirePro W2100 is a workstation one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
