GRID M6-8Q vs FirePro W7170M
GRID M6-8Q
Popular choices:
FirePro W7170M
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 GRID M6-8Q is positioned at rank 273 and the FirePro W7170M is on rank 22, so the FirePro W7170M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GRID M6-8Q
Performance Per Dollar FirePro W7170M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FirePro W7170M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (4 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GRID M6-8Q.
| Insight | GRID M6-8Q | FirePro W7170M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the FirePro W7170M 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 GRID M6-8Q and FirePro W7170M
GRID M6-8Q
The GRID M6-8Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 30 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 722 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,568 points.
FirePro W7170M
The FirePro W7170M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 2 2015. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 723 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,605 points.
Graphics Performance
The GRID M6-8Q scores 3,568 and the FirePro W7170M reaches 3,605 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID M6-8Q is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the FirePro W7170M uses GCN 3.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,536 (GRID M6-8Q) vs 2,048 (FirePro W7170M). Raw compute: 2.218 TFLOPS (GRID M6-8Q) vs 2.961 TFLOPS (FirePro W7170M).
| Feature | GRID M6-8Q | FirePro W7170M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,568 | 3,605+1% |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 3.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1536 | 2048+33% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.218 TFLOPS | 2.961 TFLOPS+33% |
| ROPs | 64+100% | 32 |
| TMUs | 96 | 128+33% |
| L1 Cache | 576 KB+13% | 512 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+300% | 0.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GRID M6-8Q | FirePro W7170M |
|---|---|---|
| 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 GRID M6-8Q comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the FirePro W7170M has 4 GB. The FirePro W7170M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GRID M6-8Q) vs 0.5 MB (FirePro W7170M) — the GRID M6-8Q has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GRID M6-8Q | FirePro W7170M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 4 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+300% | 0.5 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12_1 (GRID M6-8Q) vs 12 (FirePro W7170M). Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 3.
| Feature | GRID M6-8Q | FirePro W7170M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12_1 | 12 |
| Max Displays | 0 | 3 |
Power & Dimensions
The GRID M6-8Q draws 100W versus the FirePro W7170M's 100W — a 0% difference. The FirePro W7170M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID M6-8Q) vs 350W (FirePro W7170M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 1mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 1 slots.
| Feature | GRID M6-8Q | FirePro W7170M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W | 100W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 1mm | 0mm |
| Height | — | 0mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 35.7 | 36.0 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GRID M6-8Q and FirePro W7170M
