FirePro W4300 vs Quadro 6000
FirePro W4300
Popular choices:
Quadro 6000
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 W4300 is positioned at rank 168 and the Quadro 6000 is on rank 374, so the FirePro W4300 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar FirePro W4300
Performance Per Dollar Quadro 6000
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FirePro W4300 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro 6000 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | FirePro W4300 | Quadro 6000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / Fermi (2010−2014)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+50%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The FirePro W4300 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the FirePro W4300 holds the technical lead. Priced at $50 (vs $150), it costs 67% less, resulting in a 203% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | FirePro W4300 | Quadro 6000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+203%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($50) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($150) |
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 W4300 and Quadro 6000
FirePro W4300
The FirePro W4300 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in December 1 2015. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 930 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,719 points.
Quadro 6000
The Quadro 6000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in December 10 2010. It features the Fermi architecture. The core clock speed is 574 MHz. It has 448 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 204W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,692 points. Launch price was $4,399.
Graphics Performance
The FirePro W4300 scores 2,719 and the Quadro 6000 reaches 2,692 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FirePro W4300 is built on GCN 2.0 while the Quadro 6000 uses Fermi, both on 28 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 768 (FirePro W4300) vs 448 (Quadro 6000). Raw compute: 1.428 TFLOPS (FirePro W4300) vs 1.028 TFLOPS (Quadro 6000).
| Feature | FirePro W4300 | Quadro 6000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,719+1% | 2,692 |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | Fermi |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 768+71% | 448 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.428 TFLOPS+39% | 1.028 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 48+200% |
| TMUs | 48 | 56+17% |
| L1 Cache | 192 KB | 896 KB+367% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 768 KB+200% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FirePro W4300 | Quadro 6000 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 W4300 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro 6000 has 6 GB. The Quadro 6000 offers 50% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (FirePro W4300) vs 768 KB (Quadro 6000) — the Quadro 6000 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | FirePro W4300 | Quadro 6000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 6 GB+50% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 768 KB+200% |
Power & Dimensions
The FirePro W4300 draws 50W versus the Quadro 6000's 204W — a 121.3% difference. The FirePro W4300 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro W4300) vs 350W (Quadro 6000). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | FirePro W4300 | Quadro 6000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W-75% | 204W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 171mm | — |
| Height | 69mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 71°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 54.4+312% | 13.2 |
Value Analysis
The FirePro W4300 launched at $379 MSRP and currently averages $50, while the Quadro 6000 launched at $4399 and now averages $150. The FirePro W4300 costs 66.7% less ($100 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 54.4 (FirePro W4300) vs 17.9 (Quadro 6000) — the FirePro W4300 offers 203.9% better value. The FirePro W4300 is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2010).
| Feature | FirePro W4300 | Quadro 6000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $379-91% | $4399 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $50-67% | $150 |
| Performance per Dollar | 54.4+204% | 17.9 |
| Codename | Bonaire | GF100 |
| Release | December 1 2015 | December 10 2010 |
| Ranking | #590 | #615 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on FirePro W4300 and Quadro 6000
