AMD FirePro M5100 vs AMD Radeon 760M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single recorded head-to-head comparison in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is decisive. The AMD Radeon 760M scores 20,255 points, while the AMD FirePro M5100 manages 6,830 points. That is a 66.3% advantage for the Radeon 760M, a gap so large that it redefines the competitive relationship between the two.

The FirePro M5100's score of 6,830 places it at the 38th percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R7 M370 at 6,764 (1% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 at 6,698 (2% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M at 6,946 (1.7% ahead). The FirePro sits in a tight cluster where a single percentage point separates it from the R7 M370, and roughly two points separate the entire group. This suggests the M5100 is competitive with other mobile GPUs of its era, but it is fundamentally anchored to that performance class.

The Radeon 760M's OpenCL score of 20,255 puts it at the 35th percentile overall, which is slightly lower than the FirePro's percentile despite the vastly higher raw score. This happens because the 760M is compared against a much larger and more modern field of GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6400 at 6,001 (0.3% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M at 6,000 (0.3% behind), and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server at 5,996 (0.4% behind). These deltas are remarkably small, indicating the 760M's average score across all benchmark tests, not just OpenCL, is tightly clustered with these competitors.

Looking at the full benchmark suite for the Radeon 760M, the OpenCL result is its strongest showing. In Vulkan, it scores 30,336, and in Passmark G3D, it scores 5,310. The Passmark DirectX tests are much lower, with DirectX 9 at 65, DirectX 11 at 52, and DirectX 12 at 25. The Passmark G2D score is 890, and GPU compute is 2,840. The FirePro M5100 has only the single OpenCL result in the database, so the 760M's breadth of testing cannot be matched directly. Still, the one test they share tells the story clearly: the newer architecture wins by a wide margin.

The FirePro M5100 has zero recorded benchmark wins in the head-to-head comparison, while the Radeon 760M has one. The data does not support any scenario where the FirePro takes a performance victory in the tests that were run. The 66.3% delta in OpenCL is not a marginal improvement; it is a generational leap.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are separated by more than a decade of design philosophy and process technology. The FirePro M5100 uses the Venus chip based on GCN 1.0 architecture, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The Radeon 760M uses the Phoenix chip based on RDNA 3.0, built on a 4 nm process, also at TSMC. The process shrink from 28 nm to 4 nm is the single largest physical difference, and it enables the 760M to pack far more transistors into a slightly larger die.

The FirePro M5100 contains 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, giving it a transistor density of 12.2 million per square millimeter. The Radeon 760M contains 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, for a density of 142.6 million per square millimeter. That is more than ten times the transistor density, which explains how the 760M achieves dramatically higher clock speeds and raw compute throughput despite being an integrated graphics processor.

Clock speeds tell a similar story. The FirePro M5100 has a base clock of 725 MHz and a boost clock of 775 MHz. The Radeon 760M has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2,599 MHz. The boost clock difference is more than threefold, and this is reflected in the compute figures. The FirePro M5100 delivers 992.0 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Radeon 760M delivers 5.323 TFLOPS. The 760M also supports FP16 at 5.323 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the FirePro lists no FP16 capability.

Memory is another fundamental divergence. The FirePro M5100 comes with 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 72.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon 760M uses system shared memory, with a bus width and bandwidth listed as system dependent. This means the 760M's memory performance is entirely contingent on the host system's RAM configuration, whereas the FirePro has fixed, dedicated resources.

The shading complex also differs. The FirePro M5100 has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The Radeon 760M has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Despite having fewer shaders and TMUs, the 760M achieves much higher pixel and texture rates due to its clock speed advantage. The FirePro posts a pixel rate of 12.40 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 31.00 GTexel/s. The 760M reaches 41.58 GPixel/s and 83.17 GTexel/s.

The Radeon 760M also includes 8 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the FirePro M5100. The 760M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the FirePro is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the Vulkan versions differ: the 760M supports Vulkan 1.4, while the FirePro supports 1.2.170. The 760M is an integrated graphics processor with a 15 W TDP, no power connectors, and a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The FirePro is an MXM module with an MXM-A (3.0) interface, intended for mobile workstations.

The release dates underscore the generational gap. The FirePro M5100 launched on October 15, 2013, and is marked as end-of-life. The Radeon 760M launched on January 30, 2024, and is listed as active. The FirePro's predecessor is FirePro Mobility and its successor is Radeon Pro Mobile. The 760M's predecessor is Navi II IGP, and it has no successor listed.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon 760M wins in every benchmark category where both have data. In OpenCL, it is 66.3% faster than the FirePro M5100. The 760M also has a much broader benchmark footprint, with scores in Vulkan, multiple Passmark DirectX tests, G2D, G3D, and GPU compute. The FirePro M5100 only has the single OpenCL result, so there is no recorded data for it in any other test.

For compute-heavy workloads, the Radeon 760M is the clear choice. Its OpenCL score of 20,255 and Vulkan score of 30,336 indicate strong general-purpose GPU performance. The FirePro's 6,830 OpenCL score places it in the same league as older mobile GPUs like the GTX 675M, which is 1.7% ahead, and the R7 M370, which is 1% behind. This suggests the FirePro is adequate for legacy compute tasks but cannot compete with modern integrated graphics.

For gaming, the Radeon 760M's Passmark DirectX 11 score of 52 and DirectX 12 score of 25 are modest, but they exist at all. The FirePro has no recorded DirectX benchmark results, so no comparison is possible. The 760M's 8 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support give it features that the FirePro simply does not have, even if the raw scores in older DirectX tests are not overwhelming.

The FirePro M5100's only advantage is its dedicated memory configuration. With 2 GB of GDDR5 and a fixed 72.00 GB/s bandwidth, it offers predictable memory performance that does not depend on the host system. The Radeon 760M's system shared memory means its bandwidth is entirely dependent on the laptop's RAM and memory controller. In a system with slow or insufficient RAM, the 760M's performance could degrade.

The FirePro is also an end-of-life product, meaning it is no longer in production. The Radeon 760M is active and current. For anyone building a new system, the 760M is the only realistic option between the two, given that the FirePro is a legacy part from 2013.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL benchmarks?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M scores 20,255 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD FirePro M5100 scores 6,830. The 760M leads by 66.3%.

Q: What are the architecture differences between the two?

A: The FirePro M5100 uses GCN 1.0 architecture on a 28 nm process with 1,500 million transistors. The Radeon 760M uses RDNA 3.0 on a 4 nm process with 25,390 million transistors.

Q: Does the FirePro M5100 support ray tracing?

A: No. The FirePro M5100 has no ray tracing cores. The Radeon 760M has 8 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate.

Q: How do their memory configurations compare?

A: The FirePro M5100 has 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 72.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon 760M uses system shared memory, with bandwidth listed as system dependent.

Q: What is the clock speed difference?

A: The FirePro M5100 has a base clock of 725 MHz and a boost clock of 775 MHz. The Radeon 760M has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2,599 MHz.

Q: Which GPU is still in production?

A: The Radeon 760M is listed as active, while the FirePro M5100 is end-of-life. The FirePro launched on October 15, 2013, and the 760M launched on January 30, 2024.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The AMD Radeon 760M outperforms the AMD FirePro M5100 in the only benchmark test they share, and it does so by 66.3%. The 760M's OpenCL score of 20,255 versus 6,830 is not a close contest, and the architectural differences explain why. A 4 nm process, a boost clock of 2,599 MHz, 5.323 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, and 8 ray tracing cores put the 760M in a different performance class entirely.

The FirePro M5100's percentile ranking of 38 is actually higher than the 760M's 35, but this is a reflection of the comparison pool. The FirePro is measured against other 2013-era mobile GPUs, while the 760M is measured against a modern field that includes discrete cards like the RX 6400 and GTX 770M. The 760M's average benchmark score of 6,019 across all tests is close to the FirePro's single OpenCL score of 6,830, but the 760M's peak scores are far higher.

For compute workloads, the choice is the Radeon 760M. Its Vulkan score of 30,336 and OpenCL score of 20,255 demonstrate strong general-purpose performance. For gaming, the 760M has recorded DirectX scores and ray tracing support, while the FirePro has none. For anyone considering a new system, the FirePro M5100 is an end-of-life product from 2013 with no path forward. The Radeon 760M is active, current, and supported with modern APIs.

The only scenario where the FirePro M5100 makes sense is a legacy system that requires its specific MXM module form factor and dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory. But even then, its 992.0 GFLOPS of FP32 performance and 775 MHz boost clock place it far behind the 760M's 5.323 TFLOPS and 2,599 MHz boost. The database records one head-to-head test, and the winner is the Radeon 760M. The verdict follows the data.