ATI FireMV 2200 vs Quadro K610M

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking913not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.21no data
Power efficiency4.32no data
ArchitectureKepler 2.0 (2013−2015)R300 (2005−2008)
GPU code nameGK208RV370
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date23 July 2013 (11 years ago)2006 (18 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$229.99 no data

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 cores192no data
Core clock speed980 MHz324 MHz
Number of transistors915 million107 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm110 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate15.681.296
Floating-point processing power0.3763 TFLOPSno data
ROPs84
TMUs164

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 1.0 x16
Lengthno data170 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 amount1 GB128 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed650 MHz392 MBps
Memory bandwidth20.8 GB/s3.136 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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x DMS-59
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus+-
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX129.0
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.52.0
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA+-

Pros & cons summary


Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 128 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 110 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 15 Watt

Quadro K610M has a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 292.9% more advanced lithography process.

ATI FireMV 2200, on the other hand, has 100% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Quadro K610M and FireMV 2200. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro K610M is a mobile workstation card while FireMV 2200 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.


NVIDIA Quadro K610M
Quadro K610M
ATI FireMV 2200
FireMV 2200

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 25 votes

Rate Quadro K610M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 6 votes

Rate FireMV 2200 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.