AMD FirePro M5100 vs AMD FirePro W600 Comparison

AMD FirePro M5100 and AMD FirePro W600 are both end-of-life professional workstation GPUs built on AMD’s GCN 1.0 architecture, but they target different physical environments: the M5100 is an MXM mobile module, while the W600 is a single-slot desktop card. The data shows a clear, if modest, performance gap in favor of the M5100, along with meaningful differences in memory bandwidth, shader configuration, and physical design. The M5100 leads the W600 in the sole OpenCL benchmark, while the W600 compensates with a fixed launch MSRP and a specific multi-display output configuration.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU scores higher in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The AMD FirePro M5100 scores 6830, which is 9.8% higher than the AMD FirePro W600’s score of 6223 in the same test.

Q: How does the M5100 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The M5100 is 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 M370 and 2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010. It trails the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M by 1.7% and the AMD Radeon R5 M240 by 2.1%.

Q: What is the performance context for the W600?

A: The W600’s score of 6223 places it within 0.2% of the AMD Radeon HD 6950. It is 0.7% behind both the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER, and 0.9% behind the NVIDIA Quadro K620.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same modern APIs?

A: Yes, both the M5100 and W600 support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, indicating identical API feature levels despite their hardware differences.

Q: What is the physical form factor difference?

A: The M5100 is an MXM Module (MXM-A 3.0 interface) with display outputs described as “Portable Device Dependent,” meaning it is designed for laptops. The W600 is a Single-slot desktop card with six mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs.

Q: Which card has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The M5100 has 72.00 GB/s bandwidth, which is 12.5% higher than the W600’s 64.00 GB/s, even though both use 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the same fundamental architecture: GCN 1.0, built on a 28 nm TSMC process with 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.2M per mm². However, the internal execution resources differ significantly. The M5100 uses the Venus chip and packs 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 ROPs. The W600 uses the Cape Verde chip and scales down to 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and the same 16 ROPs. This represents a 20% reduction in shader count and TMU count for the W600 relative to the M5100.

The clock speeds also diverge. The M5100 operates at a base clock of 725 MHz with a boost up to 775 MHz, while the W600’s base and boost clocks are not specified in the data. The memory clocks differ as well: the M5100 runs at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective), whereas the W600 runs at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective). The combined effect of fewer shaders and lower memory clock results in the W600’s reduced compute throughput. The M5100 delivers 992.0 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, 31.00 GTexel/s texture fill rate, and 12.40 GPixel/s pixel rate. The W600, by contrast, delivers 768.0 GFLOPS, 24.00 GTexel/s, and 12.00 GPixel/s.

Physical architecture differences extend beyond the chip. The M5100 is a mobile module with an MXM-A (3.0) bus interface, drawing power from the host system without a specified TDP or power connectors. The W600 is a desktop card with a 75 W TDP, no external power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The W600’s dimensions are specified as 168 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 20 mm in width, while the M5100’s dimensions are not listed. The W600 also has a specific six mini-DisplayPort 1.2 output array, whereas the M5100’s outputs are dependent on the portable device it is installed into.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD FirePro M5100 is the faster GPU. It wins the head-to-head OpenCL benchmark with a score of 6830 against the W600’s 6223, a 9.8% advantage. The M5100’s higher shader count, higher clocks, and higher memory bandwidth all contribute to this lead. For any workload that relies on raw compute performance, such as OpenCL-accelerated tasks, the M5100 is the superior choice. Its percentile ranking of 38 versus the W600’s 36 among all GPUs reinforces this, though both cards sit in the lower-middle portion of the performance spectrum.

The W600’s case rests on its physical design rather than raw speed. It is a self-contained, single-slot desktop card with a fixed 75 W TDP, no power connectors, and a modest 250 W suggested PSU. Its six mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs make it a candidate for multi-display professional setups where the M5100’s portable-device-dependent outputs would be inadequate. The W600 also has a documented launch MSRP of 599 USD, which is information the M5100 lacks. For a workstation that requires many simultaneous display outputs from a compact, low-power desktop card, the W600 is the appropriate pick. For maximum compute performance in a mobile form factor, the M5100 is the clear winner.

Specification Differences

The following table highlights the key differences between the two GPUs based on the FACT PACK data. Fields that are identical (such as process node, die size, transistor count, memory type, bus width, ROP count, and API support) are omitted for clarity.

| Specification | AMD FirePro M5100 | AMD FirePro W600 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | Venus | Cape Verde |

| Generation | FirePro Mobile (Mx100) | FirePro GCN (Wx000) |

| Base Clock | 725 MHz | Not specified |

| Boost Clock | 775 MHz | Not specified |

| Memory Clock | 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) | 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 72.00 GB/s | 64.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 640 | 512 |

| TMUs | 40 | 32 |

| FP32 Performance | 992.0 GFLOPS | 768.0 GFLOPS |

| Texture Rate | 31.00 GTexel/s | 24.00 GTexel/s |

| Pixel Rate | 12.40 GPixel/s | 12.00 GPixel/s |

| TDP | Not specified | 75 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | Not specified | None |

| Suggested PSU | Not specified | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 |

| Dimensions | Not specified | 168 mm x 111 mm x 20 mm |

| Release Date | 2013-10-15 | 2012-06-12 |

| Predecessor | FirePro Mobility | FirePro Terascale |

| Successor | Radeon Pro Mobile | Radeon Pro Polaris |

| Launch MSRP | Not specified | 599 USD |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it yields a decisive result. The AMD FirePro M5100 scores 6830, which is 9.8% higher than the AMD FirePro W600’s 6223. This is the M5100’s only win in the head-to-head table, but it is the only test listed, giving it a 1-0 record.

The 9.8% delta is significant and aligns with the hardware specifications. The M5100 has 25% more shading units (640 vs 512) and 25% more TMUs (40 vs 32), which directly boosts its compute throughput. Its FP32 output of 992.0 GFLOPS is 29.2% higher than the W600’s 768.0 GFLOPS. The memory subsystem also favors the M5100: its 72.00 GB/s bandwidth is 12.5% higher than the W600’s 64.00 GB/s, driven by the higher effective memory clock of 4.5 Gbps versus 4 Gbps. The pixel rate is nearly identical (12.40 vs 12.00 GPixel/s), as both cards share 16 ROPs, but the texture rate gap mirrors the TMU count: 31.00 GTexel/s versus 24.00 GTexel/s, a 29.2% difference.

Looking at the rival context, the M5100’s score of 6830 places it in a tight cluster. It is 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 M370 (6764) and 2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 (6698). It falls slightly behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M (6946) by 1.7% and the AMD Radeon R5 M240 (6975) by 2.1%. The W600’s score of 6223 is similarly competitive within its own peer group: it is 0.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 6950 (6210), but 0.7% behind both the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 (6270) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER (6270), and 0.9% behind the NVIDIA Quadro K620 (6282). These rival deltas show that both cards are near the middle of their respective performance bands, with the M5100 holding a slight edge over the W600 that is consistent across the broader comparison.