GPU Comparison

The AMD FirePro M5100 and AMD Radeon RX 6400 occupy the low end of the database, yet they represent two very different eras of AMD GPU design. The FirePro M5100 is a 2013 mobile workstation part built on the Venus chip, while the Radeon RX 6400 arrived in 2022 as a compact RDNA 2.0 desktop card. Despite the nine-year gap implied by their release dates, the recorded data shows the two landing within three percentile points of all GPUs in the database (38 versus 35), which makes this a curious pairing: a much newer card with far higher peak throughput that still ranks in roughly the same neighborhood overall.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only one test appears in the recorded data for both GPUs: geekbench_opencl. The result is not close.

The Radeon RX 6400 scores 32011 in geekbench_opencl, against 6830 for the FirePro M5100, a gap of 78.7 percent in the RX 6400's favor. That is not a generational nudge, it is a rout on the one metric the two share. The FirePro's 6830 is also its only recorded benchmark, so its entire competitive profile rests on a single OpenCL measurement.

Context from each card's rival cluster sharpens the picture. The FirePro M5100's 6830 sits within a tight band: it is 1 percent ahead of the Radeon R7 M370 (6764), 2 percent ahead of the GeForce GT 1010 (6698), 1.7 percent behind the GeForce GTX 675M (6946), and 2.1 percent behind the Radeon R5 M240 (6975). In other words, it trades blows with a cluster of older entry-level mobile and desktop parts. The RX 6400's OpenCL result of 32011 is nearly five times higher, which raises the question of why its percentile ranking is not commensurately higher. The answer lies in how the database aggregates: the RX 6400's average benchmark score across all ten of its recorded tests is 6001, dragged down heavily by low Passmark DirectX subscores of 30, 54, 70, and 93, plus a 3DMark Steel Nomad result of 176. The FirePro, with one test, averages 6830. Averages built on different test mixes are not directly comparable, and the head-to-head record is the cleaner signal.

The RX 6400's fuller benchmark sheet does include strong entries: passmark_g3d of 7673 and geekbench_vulkan of 16372 sit alongside passmark_gpu_compute at 2812 and passmark_g2d at 722. The DirectX-scoped Passmark results are strikingly low, which suggests the card's narrow 64-bit memory interface may be punishing it in those specific graphics workloads even as compute-oriented tests fly.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows one shared test, and the Radeon RX 6400 wins it. That is the entirety of the recorded head-to-head: winsA is 0, winsB is 1.

For the FirePro M5100, the honest reading is that nothing in the benchmark record favors it. Its case must instead be argued from identity and platform. It is an MXM module aimed at mobile workstations, with certified professional lineage (the FirePro brand, succeeded by Radeon Pro Mobile), and it fits machines the RX 6400 physically cannot. Its nearest rivals, all within roughly 2 percent in the database's average scores, are themselves modest parts, which frames the M5100 as a peer of entry-level mobile GPUs of its era rather than a competitor to anything modern.

The RX 6400 wins compute decisively, and the shape of its wins matters. Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan both land high, while DirectX-titled Passmark tests land low. The data therefore implies the RX 6400 is the pick where GPU compute or modern API throughput is the workload, and it is questionable where legacy DirectX paths dominate. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) feature level and Vulkan 1.4 support, versus the FirePro's DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170, reinforce that split: the newer card can run feature paths the older one simply cannot expose.

The Verdict

Strictly from the recorded data, the Radeon RX 6400 is the stronger GPU. It wins the only shared benchmark by 78.7 percent, and its architecture-spanning test sheet shows it competing with parts like the GeForce GTX 770M (6000, a dead-even 0 percent delta), the FirePro W4100 (5987, 0.2 percent), and the Quadro K4000M (5986, 0.3 percent), plus a statistical tie with the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server at 5996, though that last pairing almost certainly reflects the averaging quirk noted above rather than genuine parity.

The FirePro M5100 is not a purchase candidate on performance grounds; it wins nothing here. Its relevance is as an MXM-A (3.0) workstation module for compatible laptops, an end-of-life part whose 38th-percentile ranking comes from a single OpenCL score. Anyone choosing between the two for a desktop build has, on this data, no reason to prefer the M5100. Anyone maintaining an older mobile workstation may have no alternative that fits the slot at all.

One number deserves a single mention: the RX 6400 carried a launch MSRP of 159 USD. Beyond that, the performance data speaks for itself.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the shared benchmark? A: The Radeon RX 6400, by a wide margin. It scores 32011 in geekbench_opencl versus 6830 for the FirePro M5100, a 78.7 percent gap.

Q: How do the two rank against all GPUs in the database? A: The FirePro M5100 sits in the 38th percentile and the RX 6400 in the 35th, a surprisingly close pair despite the RX 6400's massive OpenCL lead.

Q: What rivals are closest to each card? A: The FirePro M5100 trades blows with the Radeon R7 M370 (1 percent), GeForce GTX 675M (-1.7 percent), GT 1010 (2 percent), and R5 M240 (-2.1 percent). The RX 6400's nearest rivals are the GTX 770M (0 percent), RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server (0.1 percent), FirePro W4100 (0.2 percent), and Quadro K4000M (0.3 percent).

Q: Which modern APIs does each support? A: The RX 6400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The FirePro M5100 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: Does the RX 6400 have ray tracing hardware? A: Yes, it has 12 ray tracing cores as part of its RDNA 2.0 design. The FirePro M5100 has none.

Q: How much raw compute does each deliver? A: The RX 6400 reaches 3.565 TFLOPS FP32 and 7.130 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1), while the FirePro M5100 delivers 992.0 GFLOPS FP32, with no FP16 figure recorded.

Architecture Differences

The two cards bookend nearly a decade of AMD design. The FirePro M5100 uses GCN 1.0 on the Venus chip, fabricated at TSMC on a 28 nm process, packing 1,500 million transistors into a 123 mm² die for a density of 12.2M per mm². The RX 6400 uses RDNA 2.0 on Navi 24, built at TSMC on 6 nm, with 5,400 million transistors in a smaller 107 mm² die and a density of 50.5M per mm². More than four times the transistors in a smaller die area is the clearest single illustration of how far the process technology moved between these parts.

The architectural features diverge accordingly. RDNA 2.0 brings 12 ray tracing cores; GCN 1.0 has none, and neither card lists tensor cores. The RX 6400 also records a game clock of 2039 MHz between its 1923 MHz base and 2321 MHz boost, a concept absent from the FirePro's simpler 725 MHz base and 775 MHz boost. Memory technology follows the same arc: GDDR5 at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) on a 128-bit bus yielding 72.00 GB/s for the M5100, versus GDDR6 at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) on a 64-bit bus yielding 128.0 GB/s for the RX 6400. Note the trade: the newer card doubles effective bandwidth on half the bus width, and that narrow interface is the most plausible explanation for its weak Passmark DirectX results.

Their places in AMD's product lineage also differ in kind. The FirePro belongs to the FirePro Mobile (Mx100) generation, succeeded by Radeon Pro Mobile; the RX 6400 belongs to the Navi II (RX 6000) generation, preceded by Navi and succeeded by Navi III. Both are marked end-of-life in the database.

Specification Differences

• Form factor and interface: The FirePro M5100 is an MXM Module on MXM-A (3.0); the RX 6400 is a single-slot desktop card on PCIe 4.0 x4 with no power connectors.
• Power: The RX 6400 lists a 53 W TDP and a 250 W suggested PSU; the FirePro M5100 records no TDP or PSU figure.
• Display outputs: The M5100's outputs are portable-device dependent; the RX 6400 provides 1x HDMI 2.1 and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a.
• Memory: 2 GB GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus (72.00 GB/s) for the M5100, versus 4 GB GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus (128.0 GB/s) for the RX 6400.
• Shader resources: 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs for the M5100, versus 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs for the RX 6400.
• Throughput: The M5100 delivers 12.40 GPixel/s and 31.00 GTexel/s; the RX 6400 delivers 74.27 GPixel/s and 111.4 GTexel/s, roughly six times the pixel rate and more than three times the texture rate.
• Clocks: 725/775 MHz base/boost for the M5100; 1923/2321 MHz base/boost with a 2039 MHz game clock for the RX 6400.
• API support: DirectX 12 (11_1), Vulkan 1.2.170 on the M5100; DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4 on the RX 6400.
• Release and status: Both are end-of-life; the M5100's recorded release date is in 2013 and the RX 6400's in 2022.