GeForce GTX 675M vs FirePro M6000
GeForce GTX 675M
Popular choices:
FirePro M6000
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 GeForce GTX 675M is positioned at rank 129 and the FirePro M6000 is on rank 193, so the GeForce GTX 675M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 675M
Performance Per Dollar FirePro M6000
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 675M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.9% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the FirePro M6000.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 675M | FirePro M6000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.9%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.9%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GTX 675M remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
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 GeForce GTX 675M and FirePro M6000
GeForce GTX 675M
The GeForce GTX 675M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 22 2012. It features the Fermi 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 620 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,855 points.
FirePro M6000
The FirePro M6000 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in July 1 2012. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 800 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 43W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,820 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 675M scores 1,855 and the FirePro M6000 reaches 1,820 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 675M is built on Fermi 2.0 while the FirePro M6000 uses GCN 1.0, both on 40 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce GTX 675M) vs 640 (FirePro M6000). Raw compute: 0.9523 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 675M) vs 1.024 TFLOPS (FirePro M6000).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 675M | FirePro M6000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,855+2% | 1,820 |
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 640+67% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.9523 TFLOPS | 1.024 TFLOPS+8% |
| ROPs | 32+100% | 16 |
| TMUs | 64+60% | 40 |
| L1 Cache | 512 KB+220% | 160 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 675M | FirePro M6000 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 2 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 256-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (GeForce GTX 675M) vs 256 KB (FirePro M6000) — the GeForce GTX 675M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 675M | FirePro M6000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit+300% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (GeForce GTX 675M) vs 11.1 (FirePro M6000). OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 6.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 675M | FirePro M6000 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_0)+8% | 11.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6+2% |
| Max Displays | 3 | 6+100% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: No NVENC (Fermi) (GeForce GTX 675M) vs VCE 1.0 (FirePro M6000). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP4 vs UVD 4.0. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GTX 675M) vs MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264,MPEG-4 (FirePro M6000).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 675M | FirePro M6000 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | No NVENC (Fermi) | VCE 1.0 |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP4 | UVD 4.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 | MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264,MPEG-4 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 675M draws 100W versus the FirePro M6000's 43W — a 79.7% difference. The FirePro M6000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 675M) vs 350W (FirePro M6000). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 82°C vs 85.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 675M | FirePro M6000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W | 43W-57% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 0mm |
| Height | — | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | 82°C-4% | 85 |
| Perf/Watt | 18.6 | 42.3+127% |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce GTX 675M and FirePro M6000
