AMD FirePro M5100 vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 Comparison

AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 vs AMD FirePro M5100

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a single direct comparison between these two mobile-class professional GPUs: the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark. In that test, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 scores 7,333 points against the AMD FirePro M5100's 6,830 points. That is a 7.4% advantage for the newer card, a meaningful gap in compute workloads that rely on raw parallel throughput. The WX 3100 therefore takes the only head-to-head win recorded, with 1 win for the Radeon Pro WX 3100 and 0 for the FirePro M5100.

Context from the wider database reinforces this result. The Radeon Pro WX 3100's average benchmark score sits at 7,580, while the FirePro M5100 averages 6,830. That places the WX 3100 in the 41st percentile of all GPUs, versus the 38th percentile for the FirePro M5100. The gap in percentile ranking is modest, but the raw score difference is consistent: the WX 3100 is roughly 11% higher on average across all recorded workloads. The FirePro M5100's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M, which sits 1.7% higher in average score, and the AMD Radeon R5 M240, which is 2.1% higher. The Radeon Pro WX 3100, by contrast, leads the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 by 1.4% and trails the AMD Radeon 540 by only 1.2%.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon Pro WX 3100 wins in every measurable category that the database captures. Its OpenCL score is higher, its average benchmark score is higher, and its percentile placement is better. For compute-heavy tasks such as rendering, simulation, or GPU-accelerated analysis, the data points squarely at the WX 3100. The 7.4% lead in the direct OpenCL comparison is not enormous, but it is consistent across the aggregate data.

The FirePro M5100 does not win any benchmark category in the database. Its strongest argument is the specification sheet, where it packs more shading units (640 versus 512) and more texture mapping units (40 versus 32). That hardware advantage, however, does not translate into a win in the recorded performance tests. The FirePro M5100's lower clock speeds, 725 MHz base and 775 MHz boost, compared to the WX 3100's 925 MHz base and 1,219 MHz boost, appear to negate the extra execution units. In practice, the database shows no scenario where the FirePro M5100 comes out ahead.

For professionals choosing between these two, the verdict is straightforward. The Radeon Pro WX 3100 is the faster card in compute workloads. The FirePro M5100 might still be found in older laptops, but the benchmark evidence gives no reason to prefer it over the WX 3100.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different eras of AMD's GPU design. The Radeon Pro WX 3100 uses the Lexa chip built on GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The FirePro M5100 uses the Venus chip with GCN 1.0 architecture, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. That process shrink is significant: the WX 3100 packs 2,200 million transistors into a 103 mm² die, while the FirePro M5100 fits 1,500 million transistors into a larger 123 mm² die. The resulting transistor density is 21.4 million per square millimeter for the WX 3100, versus 12.2 million for the FirePro M5100. That is a 75% density advantage for the newer part.

Clock speeds reflect the architectural generation gap. The WX 3100 runs at 925 MHz base and boosts to 1,219 MHz, while the FirePro M5100 sits at 725 MHz base and 775 MHz boost. Memory clocks also favor the newer card: 1,500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) for the WX 3100 versus 1,125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) for the FirePro M5100. Both use GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, but the WX 3100 achieves 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth against 72.00 GB/s for the older card.

The compute feature set also differs. The WX 3100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The FirePro M5100 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The WX 3100 also records FP16 performance at 1,248.3 GFLOPS (1:1 ratio with FP32), while the FirePro M5100 has no listed FP16 capability. The FirePro M5100 does have more shading units and TMUs, but the WX 3100 counters with higher clocks and a more modern architecture.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL compute?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 scores 7,333 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 7.4% higher than the FirePro M5100's 6,830.

Q: How do the memory systems compare?

A: Both cards use GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. The WX 3100 has 4 GB at 96.00 GB/s, while the FirePro M5100 has 2 GB at 72.00 GB/s.

Q: Does the FirePro M5100 have any advantage in raw hardware resources?

A: Yes, it has 640 shading units and 40 TMUs, compared to 512 shading units and 32 TMUs on the WX 3100. However, the recorded benchmarks still favor the WX 3100.

Q: What is the transistor density difference?

A: The WX 3100 has 21.4 million transistors per square millimeter on a 103 mm² die, while the FirePro M5100 has 12.2 million per square millimeter on a 123 mm² die.

Q: Which card supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The WX 3100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. The FirePro M5100 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The WX 3100 averages 7,580 across all recorded tests, placing it in the 41st percentile. The FirePro M5100 averages 6,830, placing it in the 38th percentile.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification. The Radeon Pro WX 3100 uses a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries with a 103 mm² die and 2,200 million transistors. The FirePro M5100 uses a 28 nm process from TSMC with a 123 mm² die and 1,500 million transistors. The WX 3100 has a 21.4M / mm² transistor density; the FirePro M5100 has 12.2M / mm².

Clock speeds: the WX 3100 runs at 925 MHz base and 1,219 MHz boost, while the FirePro M5100 runs at 725 MHz base and 775 MHz boost. Memory clocks are 1,500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) for the WX 3100 and 1,125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) for the FirePro M5100.

Memory capacity: 4 GB versus 2 GB. Bandwidth: 96.00 GB/s versus 72.00 GB/s. Shading units: 512 versus 640. TMUs: 32 versus 40. ROPs are equal at 16. FP32 performance: 1,248.3 GFLOPS versus 992.0 GFLOPS. Pixel rate: 19.50 GPixel/s versus 12.40 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 39.01 GTexel/s versus 31.00 GTexel/s.

The WX 3100 has a TDP of 65 W and a suggested PSU of 250 W, with no power connectors required. The FirePro M5100 has no TDP listed, no PSU suggestion, and no power connector information. The WX 3100 is a single-slot card with PCIe 3.0 x8 interface and display outputs of 1x DisplayPort 1.4a plus 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. The FirePro M5100 is an MXM Module with MXM-A (3.0) interface and display outputs described as "Portable Device Dependent."

The WX 3100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The FirePro M5100 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The WX 3100 has FP16 at 1,248.3 GFLOPS (1:1); the FirePro M5100 has no FP16 listed.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 outperforms the AMD FirePro M5100 in the recorded OpenCL benchmark by 7.4%, and its average benchmark score is 11% higher. The WX 3100 also offers double the memory capacity, 4 GB versus 2 GB, higher memory bandwidth, 96.00 GB/s versus 72.00 GB/s, and significantly higher clock speeds. The FirePro M5100's only specification advantages are more shading units and more TMUs, but those do not produce a win in any recorded test.

For anyone selecting between these two for a mobile professional workstation, the Radeon Pro WX 3100 is the correct choice. It is faster in compute, has more memory, supports newer API versions, and runs on a far more efficient 14 nm process. The FirePro M5100 is an older part from 2013, and the benchmark database shows it trailing in every measurable performance category. The WX 3100's 41st percentile ranking versus 38th for the FirePro M5100 confirms that the gap is real, even if both cards sit in the lower half of the overall GPU landscape. Choose the WX 3100 for any workload that depends on OpenCL compute, memory capacity, or modern API support.