FirePro W2100 vs GeForce 920A
FirePro W2100
Popular choices:
GeForce 920A
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The FirePro W2100 is positioned at rank 190 and the GeForce 920A is on rank 396, so the FirePro W2100 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar FirePro W2100
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 920A
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FirePro W2100 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.7% higher G3D Mark score and 300% more VRAM (2 GB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 920A.
| Insight | FirePro W2100 | GeForce 920A |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.7%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+300%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce 920A offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce 920A holds the technical lead. Priced at $15 (vs $30), it costs 50% less, resulting in a 94.8% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | FirePro W2100 | GeForce 920A |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+94.8%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($30) | ✅More affordable ($15) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of FirePro W2100 and GeForce 920A
FirePro W2100
The FirePro W2100 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in August 12 2014. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 630 MHz to 680 MHz. It has 320 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 26W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 851 points.
GeForce 920A
The GeForce 920A is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 13 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 928 MHz to 941 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 829 points.
Graphics Performance
The FirePro W2100 scores 851 and the GeForce 920A reaches 829 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FirePro W2100 is built on GCN 1.0 while the GeForce 920A uses Maxwell, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 320 (FirePro W2100) vs 384 (GeForce 920A). Raw compute: 0.4352 TFLOPS (FirePro W2100) vs 0.7227 TFLOPS (GeForce 920A). Boost clocks: 680 MHz vs 941 MHz.
| Feature | FirePro W2100 | GeForce 920A |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 851+3% | 829 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 320 | 384+20% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.4352 TFLOPS | 0.7227 TFLOPS+66% |
| Boost Clock | 680 MHz | 941 MHz+38% |
| ROPs | 8 | 8 |
| TMUs | 20 | 24+20% |
| L1 Cache | 80 KB | 192 KB+140% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FirePro W2100 | GeForce 920A |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The FirePro W2100 comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce 920A has 512 MB. The FirePro W2100 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (FirePro W2100) vs 1 MB (GeForce 920A) — the GeForce 920A has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | FirePro W2100 | GeForce 920A |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB+300% | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (FirePro W2100) vs 11.0 (GeForce 920A). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 1.
| Feature | FirePro W2100 | GeForce 920A |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12+9% | 11.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2+9% | 1.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6+2% | 4.5 |
| Max Displays | 2+100% | 1 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 1.0 (FirePro W2100) vs No (GeForce 920A). Decoder: UVD 4.0 vs PureVideo HD VP5. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2,MVC (FirePro W2100) vs MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1,MPEG-4 (GeForce 920A).
| Feature | FirePro W2100 | GeForce 920A |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 1.0 | No |
| Decoder | UVD 4.0 | PureVideo HD VP5 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2,MVC | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1,MPEG-4 |
Power & Dimensions
The FirePro W2100 draws 26W versus the GeForce 920A's 33W — a 23.7% difference. The FirePro W2100 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro W2100) vs 350W (GeForce 920A). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy. Card length: 168mm vs 0mm, occupying 1 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 65°C vs 70°C.
| Feature | FirePro W2100 | GeForce 920A |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 26W-21% | 33W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Legacy |
| Length | 168mm | 0mm |
| Height | 69mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 65°C-7% | 70°C |
| Perf/Watt | 32.7+30% | 25.1 |
Value Analysis
The FirePro W2100 launched at $139 MSRP and currently averages $30, while the GeForce 920A launched at $100 and now averages $15. The GeForce 920A costs 50% less ($15 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 28.4 (FirePro W2100) vs 55.3 (GeForce 920A) — the GeForce 920A offers 94.7% better value. The GeForce 920A is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2014).
| Feature | FirePro W2100 | GeForce 920A |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $139 | $100-28% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $30 | $15-50% |
| Performance per Dollar | 28.4 | 55.3+95% |
| Codename | Oland | GM108 |
| Release | August 12 2014 | March 13 2015 |
| Ranking | #910 | #810 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on FirePro W2100 and GeForce 920A
