AMD FirePro M5100 vs AMD Radeon R7 M465 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records a single head-to-head benchmark between these two mobile GPUs, and the result is decisive. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD FirePro M5100 scores 6830, while the AMD Radeon R7 M465 scores 5841. That is a 16.9% advantage for the FirePro M5100, a substantial margin in GPU compute workloads. The FirePro M5100 wins the only recorded head-to-head comparison, giving it 1 win and the R7 M465 zero wins.

Context from the nearest rivals reinforces this gap. The FirePro M5100 sits at the 38th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the R7 M465 rests at the 33rd percentile. The FirePro M5100 is 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 M370 (6764), 2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 (6698), and 1.7% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M (6946). It also trails the AMD Radeon R5 M240 (6975) by 2.1%. These are tight margins around the 6800 to 7000 score range, meaning the FirePro M5100 competes in a slightly higher performance tier.

The R7 M465, by contrast, clusters around the 5800 to 5950 range. It is 0.3% behind the AMD Radeon R5 M435 (5859), 1.5% behind the Intel UHD Graphics 730 (5929), 1.9% behind the AMD Radeon HD 8730M (5955), and 1.9% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti (5731). The two GPUs therefore sit in different neighborhoods entirely: the FirePro M5100 is roughly 989 points higher in raw score, which translates to a performance gap that rivals comparisons cannot bridge.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the recorded OpenCL benchmark?

A: The AMD FirePro M5100 scores 6830 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 16.9% higher than the AMD Radeon R7 M465 at 5841. The FirePro M5100 wins the head-to-head comparison.

Q: How does each GPU compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The FirePro M5100 is 1% ahead of the Radeon R7 M370 and 2% ahead of the GeForce GT 1010, while sitting 1.7% behind the GeForce GTX 675M and 2.1% behind the Radeon R5 M240. The R7 M465 is 1.9% ahead of the GeForce GTX 550 Ti, but 0.3% behind the Radeon R5 M435, 1.5% behind the Intel UHD Graphics 730, and 1.9% behind the Radeon HD 8730M.

Q: Do both GPUs support DirectX 12?

A: Yes, but with different feature levels. The FirePro M5100 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the R7 M465 supports DirectX 12 (12_0). The R7 M465 has the more modern DirectX 12 feature level.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each GPU?

A: Both GPUs have 2 GB of GDDR5 memory. The FirePro M5100 uses a 128-bit bus with 72.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the R7 M465 uses a 64-bit bus with 36.00 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro M5100 has double the memory bus width and double the bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Radeon R7 M465 boosts to 1024 MHz, while the FirePro M5100 boosts to 775 MHz. The base clocks are closer: 730 MHz for the R7 M465 versus 725 MHz for the FirePro M5100.

Q: What is the transistor count for each chip?

A: The FirePro M5100 uses the Venus chip with 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. The R7 M465 uses the Topaz chip with 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die. Both are manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for raw compute performance: the AMD FirePro M5100. Its 16.9% lead in Geekbench OpenCL is the only head-to-head result recorded, and it aligns with the percentile rankings, where the FirePro M5100 reaches the 38th percentile versus the R7 M465 at the 33rd percentile. For tasks that stress OpenCL compute, such as rendering, simulation, or GPU-accelerated applications, the FirePro M5100 is the stronger choice.

However, the R7 M465 is not without merit. It belongs to a newer architecture generation, GCN 3.0, whereas the FirePro M5100 uses GCN 1.0. It also carries a higher boost clock, 1024 MHz versus 775 MHz, and supports DirectX 12 (12_0) instead of DirectX 12 (11_1). Buyers who prioritize the latest API feature level or who expect workloads to rely on higher clock speeds may find the R7 M465 more suitable, despite its lower aggregate benchmark score.

The R7 M465 also has a more modern bus interface, PCIe 3.0 x8, compared to the FirePro M5100's MXM-A (3.0) interface. The FirePro M5100, on the other hand, offers double the memory bandwidth, 72.00 GB/s versus 36.00 GB/s, which can be critical for memory-bound workloads. The verdict depends on the workload: the FirePro M5100 wins on measured compute performance and memory throughput, while the R7 M465 wins on architectural recency, clock speed, and DirectX feature level.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every core specification. The FirePro M5100 has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The R7 M465 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The FirePro M5100 therefore has 256 more shading units, 16 more TMUs, and 8 more ROPs.

Clock speeds differ as well. The FirePro M5100 runs at a 725 MHz base clock with a 775 MHz boost. The R7 M465 runs at a 730 MHz base clock with a 1024 MHz boost. The R7 M465's boost clock is 249 MHz higher, although its base clock is only 5 MHz higher.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The FirePro M5100 has a 128-bit memory bus with 72.00 GB/s bandwidth. The R7 M465 has a 64-bit bus with 36.00 GB/s bandwidth. Both have 2 GB of GDDR5 memory and a memory clock of 1125 MHz, which translates to 4.5 Gbps effective for both.

Pixel and texture rates follow the core counts. The FirePro M5100 achieves 12.40 GPixel/s and 31.00 GTexel/s. The R7 M465 achieves 8.192 GPixel/s and 24.58 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 992.0 GFLOPS for the FirePro M5100 versus 786.4 GFLOPS for the R7 M465. The R7 M465 also lists FP16 at 786.4 GFLOPS (1:1), while the FirePro M5100 has no recorded FP16 figure.

The bus interface differs: the FirePro M5100 uses MXM-A (3.0), while the R7 M465 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. The FirePro M5100 is listed as an MXM Module for slot width, while the R7 M465 has no slot width recorded. Display outputs are listed as portable device dependent for the FirePro M5100, with no display output data for the R7 M465. Both share the same memory type, GDDR5, and the same 28 nm TSMC process.

Architecture Differences

The FirePro M5100 is built on the Venus chip under GCN 1.0 architecture. The R7 M465 uses the Topaz chip under GCN 3.0 architecture. This represents a two-generation architectural jump for the R7 M465. The FirePro M5100 belongs to the FirePro Mobile (Mx100) generation, while the R7 M465 belongs to the Gem System (R7 M400) generation.

Both chips are fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. The FirePro M5100 has 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.2M per mm². The R7 M465 has 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die, giving a density of 12.4M per mm². The R7 M465's chip is slightly larger and denser, but the difference is minimal.

The shading architecture differs in scale. The FirePro M5100's 640 shading units and 40 TMUs give it a substantially larger compute pipeline. The R7 M465's 384 shading units and 24 TMUs are fewer, but the GCN 3.0 architecture introduces improvements that are not directly captured by counts alone. The R7 M465 supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, which the FirePro M5100 does not record. This suggests the R7 M465 has more flexible compute capabilities for mixed-precision workloads.

API support also differs. The FirePro M5100 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the R7 M465 supports DirectX 12 (12_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170. The R7 M465's higher DirectX feature level is a meaningful architectural distinction for newer games and applications that target DirectX 12_0 features.

The release timeline reflects the architectural gap. The FirePro M5100 was released on 2013-10-15, while the R7 M465 was released on 2016-05-14, roughly two and a half years later. Both are now end-of-life products. The FirePro M5100's predecessor is FirePro Mobility and its successor is Radeon Pro Mobile. The R7 M465's predecessor is Solar System and its successor is Polaris Mobile.

Where Each One Wins

The FirePro M5100 wins in raw compute performance. Its 6830 Geekbench OpenCL score is 16.9% higher than the R7 M465's 5841. It also wins on memory bandwidth, offering 72.00 GB/s versus 36.00 GB/s, which benefits memory-heavy workloads like large texture streaming, data processing, and high-resolution rendering. The FirePro M5100's 992.0 GFLOPS FP32 performance exceeds the R7 M465's 786.4 GFLOPS, and its pixel rate of 12.40 GPixel/s and texture rate of 31.00 GTexel/s are both higher than the R7 M465's 8.192 GPixel/s and 24.58 GTexel/s. For any workload that demands throughput, the FirePro M5100 is the measured winner.

The R7 M465 wins on architectural modernity. GCN 3.0 is two generations newer than GCN 1.0, and the R7 M465 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) compared to the FirePro M5100's DirectX 12 (11_1). It also has a higher boost clock, 1024 MHz versus 775 MHz, which can help in lightly threaded or clock-sensitive tasks. The R7 M465's FP16 support at 1:1 ratio provides a capability the FirePro M5100 does not record. Its PCIe 3.0 x8 interface is more standard for laptops than the FirePro M5100's MXM-A (3.0) interface.

The use-case split is therefore clear. Users running OpenCL compute workloads, memory-intensive rendering, or applications that scale with shader count and bandwidth should choose the FirePro M5100. Users who need the latest DirectX feature level, prefer a newer architecture with FP16 capabilities, or rely on higher boost clocks should choose the R7 M465. The benchmark data favors the FirePro M5100, but the architectural differences give the R7 M465 specific advantages for modern API support and mixed-precision compute.