FirePro S7150 vs Quadro M2000

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M2000 and FirePro S7150, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Quadro M2000
2016
4 GB 128-bit, 75 Watt
10.34
+5.7%

M2000 outperforms S7150 by a small 6% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking441459
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.630.59
Power efficiency9.454.47
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameGM206Tonga
Market segmentWorkstationWorkstation
Release date8 April 2016 (8 years ago)1 February 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$437.75 $2,399

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro M2000 has 515% better value for money than FirePro S7150.

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 cores7682048
Core clock speed796 MHz920 MHz
Boost clock speed1163 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,940 million5,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt150 Watt
Texture fill rate55.82117.8
Floating-point processing power1.786 TFLOPS3.768 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs48128

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 3.0 x16
Length201 mm241 mm
Width1" (2.5 cm)1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-pin

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 type128 BitGDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1653 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidthUp to 106 GB/s160.0 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 Connectors4x DisplayPortNo outputs
Number of simultaneous displays4no data

Supported technologies

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

3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Desktop Management+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (12_0)
Shader Model6.46.3
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.131
CUDA5.2-

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.

Quadro M2000 10.34
+5.7%
FirePro S7150 9.78

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.

Quadro M2000 3985
+5.7%
FirePro S7150 3770

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Quadro M2000 14562
FirePro S7150 27103
+86.1%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Quadro M2000 14286
FirePro S7150 29670
+108%

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 10.34 9.78
Recency 8 April 2016 1 February 2016
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 8 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 150 Watt

Quadro M2000 has a 5.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 months, and 100% lower power consumption.

FirePro S7150, on the other hand, has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro M2000 and FirePro S7150.


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 M2000
Quadro M2000
AMD FirePro S7150
FirePro S7150

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.


3.8 210 votes

Rate Quadro M2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 9 votes

Rate FirePro S7150 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.