AMD FirePro M5100 vs AMD Radeon R7 M370 Comparison

The AMD FirePro M5100 and AMD Radeon R7 M370 are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions built on the same GCN 1.0 architecture, yet they target different segments of the laptop market. The data places them in a near-identical performance tier, with the FirePro M5100 holding a 38th percentile ranking among all GPUs and the Radeon R7 M370 also sitting at the 38th percentile. This parity is reflected in their average benchmark scores, which differ by less than one percent, making the choice between them a matter of specific workload strengths rather than overall capability.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the AMD Radeon R7 M370 emerges as the winner. The R7 M370 scores 7063 points, while the FirePro M5100 trails with 6830 points. This represents a 3.3% advantage for the R7 M370, a margin that is modest but consistent across the architecture's compute capabilities. In the context of their nearest rivals, this delta is significant enough to place the R7 M370 ahead of the FirePro M5100 in the rankings, yet both cards remain within a tight cluster of competing mobile GPUs.

Looking at the broader competitive landscape, the FirePro M5100’s average score of 6830 sits just 1% above the R7 M370’s average of 6764. However, the head-to-head result reverses this, showing the R7 M370 winning by 3.3% when directly compared. This discrepancy highlights the variance in benchmark conditions, but the OpenCL result is the definitive data point for this pairing. The R7 M370 also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 6465, a test the FirePro M5100 does not have a recorded result for, suggesting the R7 M370 has broader API coverage in the available data.

The nearest rival data further contextualizes these scores. The FirePro M5100 is 1.7% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M (6946 points) and 2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 (6698 points). It also trails the AMD Radeon R5 M240 (6975 points) by 2.1%. The R7 M370, meanwhile, is 1% ahead of the GT 1010 and 2.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 M460 (6612 points), but falls 2.6% short of the GTX 675M. These figures place both cards in a performance band where differences of a few percentage points are the norm, with neither card establishing a commanding lead over the other.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon R7 M370 wins the single available head-to-head benchmark, the Geekbench OpenCL test, by a 3.3% margin. This makes it the stronger choice for OpenCL-accelerated compute tasks, such as general-purpose GPU processing in applications that leverage this API. Its additional Vulkan benchmark score of 6465, while not directly comparable to the FirePro M5100, indicates that the R7 M370 has been validated under Vulkan workloads, suggesting a broader software compatibility profile in the data. The R7 M370’s higher clock speeds, with a base of 875 MHz and boost of 960 MHz, contribute to its compute advantage despite having fewer shading units.

The FirePro M5100, on the other hand, does not win any of the recorded head-to-head benchmarks. However, its edge lies in raw hardware resources. It features 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation pipelines, compared to the R7 M370’s 384 shaders, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. This configuration yields higher theoretical fill rates: the FirePro M5100 delivers 12.40 GPixel/s and 31.00 GTexel/s, versus 7.680 GPixel/s and 23.04 GTexel/s for the R7 M370. In pixel-heavy and texture-heavy workloads, such as traditional rasterization at lower resolutions, the FirePro M5100’s hardware advantage should translate into better performance, even if the OpenCL test does not reflect this.

The FirePro M5100 also has a higher memory bandwidth at 72.00 GB/s, compared to the R7 M370’s 57.60 GB/s, which benefits memory-intensive tasks. Its FP32 throughput of 992.0 GFLOPS exceeds the R7 M370’s 737.3 GFLOPS, indicating a theoretical peak compute advantage. Yet, the benchmark data shows the R7 M370 winning, suggesting that clock speed and driver optimizations play a larger role in the tested workload than raw hardware counts.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on the GCN 1.0 architecture and fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process node, but they use different chips. The FirePro M5100 uses the Venus chip, while the R7 M370 uses the Litho chip. This results in significant physical differences. The Venus chip contains 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.2 million per mm². The Litho chip is smaller, with 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, achieving a slightly higher density of 12.3 million per mm². The smaller die and lower transistor count for the R7 M370 suggest a more streamlined design.

The memory subsystems differ notably. The FirePro M5100 runs its GDDR5 memory at 1125 MHz, translating to 4.5 Gbps effective, while the R7 M370 operates at 900 MHz, or 3.6 Gbps effective. Both have a 128-bit bus width and 2 GB of memory, but the FirePro M5100’s higher clock speed gives it a 25% bandwidth advantage. The R7 M370 compensates with higher core clocks: 875 MHz base and 960 MHz boost, against the FirePro M5100’s 725 MHz base and 775 MHz boost. This 150-185 MHz clock advantage helps the R7 M370 close the gap in compute performance.

The bus interfaces also differ. The FirePro M5100 uses an MXM-A (3.0) interface and is described as an MXM Module, while the R7 M370 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. This reflects their intended deployment: the FirePro is a mobile workstation part designed for removable modules, whereas the R7 M370 is a more conventional mobile GPU soldered to a motherboard. Both support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, indicating identical API feature sets.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro M5100 has an average benchmark score of 6830, while the AMD Radeon R7 M370 has an average score of 6764. The FirePro M5100 is 1% higher.

Q: In the direct OpenCL comparison, which card wins and by how much?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M370 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 7063 against the FirePro M5100’s 6830, a 3.3% difference.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The R7 M370 also has a recorded Vulkan benchmark score of 6465, while the FirePro M5100 does not have one listed.

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The FirePro M5100 has a memory bandwidth of 72.00 GB/s, which is higher than the R7 M370’s 57.60 GB/s due to its faster memory clock of 1125 MHz versus 900 MHz.

Q: What are the differences in shading unit counts?

A: The FirePro M5100 has 640 shading units, while the R7 M370 has 384 shading units. This gives the FirePro M5100 a theoretical FP32 throughput of 992.0 GFLOPS versus 737.3 GFLOPS for the R7 M370.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The R7 M370 has a slightly higher transistor density at 12.3 million per mm², compared to the FirePro M5100’s 12.2 million per mm², despite having fewer total transistors.

The Verdict

The data presents a nuanced picture. The Radeon R7 M370 wins the only direct benchmark comparison, taking the Geekbench OpenCL test by 3.3%. Its higher clock speeds and additional Vulkan benchmark result suggest it is the more efficient performer in real-world compute scenarios. For users prioritizing OpenCL performance or Vulkan compatibility, the R7 M370 is the better choice based on the available evidence.

However, the FirePro M5100 offers a more substantial hardware foundation. Its 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, combined with higher memory bandwidth of 72.00 GB/s and FP32 throughput of 992.0 GFLOPS, make it theoretically superior for pixel-heavy and memory-intensive workloads. The FirePro M5100’s MXM Module form factor also indicates a professional mobile workstation pedigree, which may matter for users requiring serviceable or upgradeable graphics solutions.

Given the near-identical average scores, the decision hinges on the specific workload. The R7 M370’s 3.3% OpenCL win is the only direct performance data point, so it gets the nod for general compute. The FirePro M5100’s hardware specifications point to strengths in rasterization and bandwidth-bound tasks, but without a direct benchmark to confirm this, its advantage remains theoretical. For a user with no preference for API or form factor, the R7 M370’s benchmark win makes it the safer pick in this pairing.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FirePro M5100 | AMD Radeon R7 M370 |

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

| Chip | Venus | Litho |

| Generation | FirePro Mobile (Mx100) | Gem System (R7 M300) |

| Transistors | 1,500 million | 950 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 77 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.2M / mm² | 12.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 725 MHz | 875 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 775 MHz | 960 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) | 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 72.00 GB/s | 57.60 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 640 | 384 |

| TMUs | 40 | 24 |

| ROPs | 16 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 12.40 GPixel/s | 7.680 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 31.00 GTexel/s | 23.04 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 992.0 GFLOPS | 737.3 GFLOPS |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Not specified |

| Bus Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| Release Date | 2013-10-15 | 2015-05-04 |

| Predecessor | FirePro Mobility | Solar System |

| Successor | Radeon Pro Mobile | Polaris Mobile |

| Geekbench OpenCL Score | 6830 | 7063 |

| Geekbench Vulkan Score | Not specified | 6465 |