AMD FirePro M4000 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database contains no shared test results between the AMD FirePro M4000 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB, so a direct score-for-score comparison is impossible. Instead, each card must be evaluated against its own nearest rivals and its position in the overall database. The FirePro M4000 records a single Geekbench OpenCL score of 5537, placing it in the 32nd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce MX130, scores 5508, which puts the FirePro a marginal 0.5% ahead. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M trails at 5501, a 0.7% gap, while the AMD Radeon R7 M440 scores 5483, a 1% deficit. However, the NVIDIA Quadro M500M overtakes the FirePro with a score of 5604, a 1.2% advantage. These are extremely tight margins, indicating the FirePro M4000 sits squarely in a cluster of low-end mobile GPUs from roughly a decade ago.

The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB presents a far more complex benchmark profile, with eight recorded tests spanning DirectX 9 through 12, compute, and 2D workloads. Its Passmark G3D score of 22618 is the standout figure, a massive jump over its Passmark DirectX 11 score of 219 and DirectX 10 score of 144. The DirectX 12 score of 89 and DirectX 9 score of 238 are surprisingly low relative to the G3D result, suggesting the G3D test aggregates multiple factors beyond raw API performance. The Passmark GPU compute score of 11224 is nearly half the G3D score, indicating strong but not dominant compute throughput. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 4019 provides a modern gaming-oriented measurement, while the Passmark G2D score of 1206 reflects 2D desktop acceleration capability. Despite these impressive individual scores, the RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB's average benchmark score of 4970 places it in only the 29th percentile of all GPUs, a counterintuitive result driven by the low DirectX API scores pulling the average down. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 at 4979 (a 0.2% deficit), the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics at 4998 (a 0.6% deficit), the AMD Radeon R7 M360 at 4931 (a 0.8% advantage), and the AMD Radeon R7 M265 at 4929 (a 0.8% advantage). The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB's average score is thus clustered with older low-end parts, even though its peak G3D score of 22618 is vastly higher, a discrepancy that suggests the average is heavily weighted by the API-specific tests.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational. The AMD FirePro M4000 uses the Chelsea chip built on GCN 1.0 architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process. It contains 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.2 million per mm². The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB uses the GB206 chip on Blackwell 2.0 architecture, also from TSMC but on a 5 nm process. It packs 21,900 million transistors into a 181 mm² die, achieving a density of 121.0 million per mm², nearly ten times higher. This density difference reflects the enormous leap in fabrication technology between 2012 and 2025.

The FirePro M4000 has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. It has no dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores, as those concepts did not exist in its era. The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB, by contrast, deploys 4608 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, alongside 36 ray tracing cores and 144 tensor cores. The compute capability difference is stark: the FirePro delivers 691.2 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the RTX 5060 Ti delivers 23.70 TFLOPS, a 34-fold increase. The RTX 5060 Ti also matches FP16 at 23.70 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, a feature the FirePro lacks entirely. Pixel rate jumps from 10.80 GPixel/s to 123.5 GPixel/s, and texture rate from 21.60 GTexel/s to 370.4 GTexel/s.

Memory architecture is equally divergent. The FirePro M4000 uses 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth at an effective 4 Gbps. The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB uses 16 GB of GDDR7 on the same 128-bit bus width but achieves 448.0 GB/s at 28 Gbps effective, a seven-fold bandwidth increase. API support also differs: the FirePro supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the RTX 5060 Ti supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RTX 5060 Ti thus has access to newer rendering features through DirectX 12 Ultimate, including ray tracing and mesh shaders, which the older FirePro cannot utilize.

Where Each One Wins

The FirePro M4000 wins in efficiency and physical adaptability. Its TDP of 33 W is dramatically lower than the RTX 5060 Ti's 180 W, making it suitable for thin-and-light mobile workstations. Its MXM module form factor and MXM-A (3.0) bus interface allow it to slot into modular laptop designs, and its lack of power connectors means it draws entirely from the MXM slot. The FirePro also requires no suggested power supply, whereas the RTX 5060 Ti suggests a 450 W PSU. For legacy software environments, the FirePro's support for DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170 covers older applications that may not benefit from newer API features. The FirePro's single Geekbench OpenCL score of 5537, while modest, is competitive with its immediate rivals, and its 32nd percentile ranking is actually higher than the RTX 5060 Ti's 29th percentile average ranking.

The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB wins overwhelmingly in raw performance and modern feature support. Its Passmark G3D score of 22618 dwarfs any result the FirePro could produce, and its 23.70 TFLOPS FP32 compute is in a completely different class. The RTX 5060 Ti's 36 ray tracing cores and 144 tensor cores enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI-based features like DLSS, which the FirePro cannot execute. Its 16 GB GDDR7 memory with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth supports large textures and high-resolution assets, whereas the FirePro's 1 GB GDDR5 is limited to small workloads. The RTX 5060 Ti's DirectX 12 Ultimate support ensures compatibility with the latest gaming and rendering APIs, and its Vulkan 1.4 support is a full version ahead of the FirePro's Vulkan 1.2.170. The RTX 5060 Ti also has modern display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b), while the FirePro's display outputs are listed as portable device dependent.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in every major specification category. The FirePro M4000 is built on 28 nm, while the RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB uses 5 nm. Transistor count is 1,500 million versus 21,900 million. Die size is 123 mm² versus 181 mm². Transistor density is 12.2M per mm² versus 121.0M per mm². The FirePro has no base or boost clock listed, while the RTX 5060 Ti has a base clock of 2407 MHz and a boost clock of 2572 MHz. Memory clock is 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) versus 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective). Memory size is 1 GB versus 16 GB. Memory type is GDDR5 versus GDDR7. Bus width is identical at 128 bit, but bandwidth is 64.00 GB/s versus 448.0 GB/s.

Shading units are 512 versus 4608. TMUs are 32 versus 144. ROPs are 16 versus 48. The RTX 5060 Ti has 36 RT cores and 144 tensor cores; the FirePro has none. Pixel rate is 10.80 GPixel/s versus 123.5 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 21.60 GTexel/s versus 370.4 GTexel/s. FP32 is 691.2 GFLOPS versus 23.70 TFLOPS. FP16 is null for the FirePro versus 23.70 TFLOPS (1:1) for the RTX 5060 Ti. TDP is 33 W versus 180 W. Slot width is MXM module versus dual-slot. Power connectors are none versus 1x 8-pin. Suggested PSU is null versus 450 W. Bus interface is MXM-A (3.0) versus PCIe 5.0 x8. Display outputs are portable device dependent versus 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b. DirectX support is 12 (11_1) versus 12 Ultimate (12_2). Vulkan support is 1.2.170 versus 1.4. The FirePro is end-of-life, released June 26, 2012, while the RTX 5060 Ti is active, released April 15, 2025. The FirePro has no launch MSRP; the RTX 5060 Ti has a launch MSRP of 429 USD.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro M4000 has an average benchmark score of 5537, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB has an average of 4970. The FirePro's single Geekbench score is higher than the RTX 5060 Ti's multi-test average.

Q: How does the RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB's peak performance compare to the FirePro M4000?

A: The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB records a Passmark G3D score of 22618 and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 4019. The FirePro M4000's only benchmark is a Geekbench OpenCL score of 5537. The RTX 5060 Ti's G3D result is over four times the FirePro's OpenCL score.

Q: What explains the RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB's low percentile ranking despite high peak scores?

A: The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB's average benchmark score of 4970 is dragged down by its low Passmark DirectX API scores: 144 for DirectX 10, 219 for DirectX 11, 89 for DirectX 12, and 238 for DirectX 9. These scores pull the average into the 29th percentile, even though its G3D score of 22618 is far higher.

Q: Which GPU has more memory and bandwidth?

A: The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB has 16 GB of GDDR7 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s. The FirePro M4000 has 1 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 64.00 GB/s. Both use the same bus width, but the RTX 5060 Ti has 16 times the memory and seven times the bandwidth.

Q: Are there any architectural features exclusive to the RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB?

A: Yes. The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB includes 36 ray tracing cores and 144 tensor cores, which enable hardware ray tracing and AI acceleration. The FirePro M4000 has no such cores. The RTX 5060 Ti also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, compared to the FirePro's DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: How do the nearest rivals of each card compare?

A: The FirePro M4000's nearest rival is the NVIDIA Quadro M500M, which scores 5604, a 1.2% advantage over the FirePro's 5537. The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics, which scores 4998, a 0.6% advantage over the RTX 5060 Ti's 4970 average.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the AMD FirePro M4000 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB occupy entirely different performance tiers and use cases. The FirePro M4000 is a legacy mobile workstation GPU with a 33 W TDP, 1 GB of GDDR5, and 691.2 GFLOPS of compute. Its benchmark score of 5537 places it among low-end GPUs from its era, and its nearest rivals all score within 1.2% of it, confirming it is competitive only within that narrow band. It is suitable for basic 2D workloads, legacy applications, and systems where power consumption is critical. Its MXM form factor and lack of external power connectors make it ideal for modular laptops that require minimal thermal and electrical footprint.

The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB is a modern desktop GPU with 16 GB of GDDR7, 23.70 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, and 36 ray tracing cores. Its Passmark G3D score of 22618 and compute score of 11224 demonstrate capability far beyond the FirePro's reach, and its 448.0 GB/s bandwidth supports modern high-resolution textures and complex rendering. However, its average benchmark score of 4970 and 29th percentile ranking are anomalously low due to weak DirectX API-specific scores, indicating that the card's performance is uneven across older API workloads. The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB is the clear choice for modern gaming, ray tracing, AI-accelerated tasks, and any workload that benefits from large memory capacity and high compute throughput.

The FirePro M4000 should be selected only for legacy systems, low-power mobile deployments, or applications that require its specific MXM interface and minimal power draw. The RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB should be selected for any current or future workload demanding maximum performance, modern API support, and substantial memory resources. The 12.5-year gap between their release dates (June 26, 2012 versus April 15, 2025) is reflected in every measurable metric, from transistor density to memory bandwidth to compute throughput. The only area where the FirePro M4000 leads is in the raw average benchmark score, a statistical artifact of the RTX 5060 Ti's inconsistent API test results, and in power efficiency, where its 33 W TDP is a fraction of the RTX 5060 Ti's 180 W. For anyone choosing between these two, the decision is straightforward: the RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB is a modern powerhouse, while the FirePro M4000 is a relic of a different computing era.