GRID M40 vs FirePro M6100

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. The GRID M40 is positioned at rank #265 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar GRID M40

#108

Quadro M6000

MSRP: $4999|Avg: $500

94%

#109

Quadro M6000 24GB

MSRP: $4999|Avg: $600

93%

#250

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

5909%

#265

GRID M40

MSRP: $1000|Avg: $100

100%

#266

GRID M3-3020

MSRP: $1000|Avg: $50

100%

#267

GRID P40-8Q

MSRP: $3000|Avg: $150

100%

#268

FirePro V3800

MSRP: $129|Avg: $12

100%

#269

FirePro V5800

MSRP: $479|Avg: $15

99%

#270

FirePro 3D V7800

MSRP: $759|Avg: $40

98%

#271

FirePro S9050

MSRP: $1999|Avg: $1825

98%

#272

FirePro R5000

MSRP: $1099|Avg: $150

96%

#273

GRID M6-8Q

MSRP: $1500|Avg: $100

95%

#276

GRID K120Q

MSRP: $125|Avg: $20

94%

#277

Tesla M60

MSRP: $3000|Avg: $250

93%

#279

FirePro V7900

MSRP: $999|Avg: $120

90%

#280

GRID P6-4Q

MSRP: $2000|Avg: $150

88%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GRID M40 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the FirePro M6100.

Insight	GRID M40	FirePro M6100
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+0.2%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.2%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Maxwell (2014−2017))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	—	—

💎 Value Proposition

The FirePro M6100 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the FirePro M6100 holds the technical lead. Priced at $30 (vs $100), it costs 70% less, resulting in a 232.7% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	GRID M40	FirePro M6100
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+232.7%)
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($100)	✅More affordable ($30)

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.

GRID M40 Benchmark Check

FirePro M6100 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GRID M40 and FirePro M6100

GRID M40

The GRID M40 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 18 2016. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1033 MHz to 1000 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,500 points.

FirePro M6100

The FirePro M6100 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 27 2014. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 1100 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,495 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GRID M40 scores 2,500 and the FirePro M6100 reaches 2,495 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID M40 is built on Maxwell while the FirePro M6100 uses GCN 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 384 (GRID M40) vs 896 (FirePro M6100). Raw compute: 0.7933 TFLOPS (GRID M40) vs 1.971 TFLOPS (FirePro M6100).

Feature	GRID M40	FirePro M6100
G3D Mark Score	2,500	2,495
Architecture	Maxwell	GCN 2.0
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	384	896+133%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.7933 TFLOPS	1.971 TFLOPS+148%
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	32	56+75%
L1 Cache	192 KB	224 KB+17%
L2 Cache	2 MB+700%	0.25 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GRID M40	FirePro M6100
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)

Both cards feature 2 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GRID M40) vs 0.25 MB (FirePro M6100) — the GRID M40 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GRID M40	FirePro M6100
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	2 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	64-bit
L2 Cache	2 MB+700%	0.25 MB

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GRID M40 draws 50W versus the FirePro M6100's 150W — a 100% difference. The GRID M40 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID M40) vs 350W (FirePro M6100). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.

Feature	GRID M40	FirePro M6100
TDP	50W-67%	150W
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	PCIe-powered
Length	—	0mm
Height	—	0mm
Slots	—	0
Temp (Load)	—	85
Perf/Watt	50.0+201%	16.6

💰

Value Analysis

The GRID M40 launched at $1000 MSRP and currently averages $100, while the FirePro M6100 launched at $0 and now averages $30. The FirePro M6100 costs 70% less ($70 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 25.0 (GRID M40) vs 83.2 (FirePro M6100) — the FirePro M6100 offers 232.8% better value. The GRID M40 is the newer GPU (2016 vs 2014).