AMD FirePro M5100 vs Intel UHD Graphics P750 Comparison

The data places the AMD FirePro M5100 and Intel UHD Graphics P750 in the same performance tier, both sitting at the 38th percentile of all GPUs. However, the AMD part holds a measurable edge in the only available benchmark, making it the stronger choice for compute workloads. The Intel P750, despite its lower raw score, offers a fundamentally different feature set with a newer architecture and higher pixel throughput, making it suitable for display-centric tasks. The verdict is clear: pick the FirePro M5100 for raw compute performance, and the UHD Graphics P750 for integrated efficiency and modern API support.

The Verdict

The AMD FirePro M5100 is the outright winner in computational performance. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, it scores 6830 points, which is 4.2% higher than the Intel UHD Graphics P750’s 6554. This is a definitive, albeit modest, victory. For any workload that relies on general-purpose GPU compute, the FirePro M5100 is the superior part.

The Intel UHD Graphics P750, however, is not without merit. Its primary advantage is its integration. As an IGP with a 15 W TDP, it offers a level of power efficiency and system simplicity that a discrete MXM module like the FirePro M5100 cannot match. Furthermore, its architecture is significantly newer, supporting DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, which are more modern than the FirePro's DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. For a system builder prioritizing a compact, low-power design with the latest graphics API feature set, the Intel part is the logical choice.

In short, the data shows a clear split. The FirePro M5100 is for users who need the maximum compute throughput available in this comparison. The Intel UHD Graphics P750 is for users who need a capable integrated graphics solution with modern API support and minimal power draw. The 4.2% performance gap in favor of AMD is real, but the architectural and physical differences between the two are far more significant than the benchmark score alone suggests.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD FirePro M5100 is a discrete mobile workstation part based on the Venus chip, using the older GCN 1.0 architecture. It is fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 123 mm² and a transistor count of 1,500 million. This gives it a transistor density of 12.2M per mm². It is an end-of-life product from the FirePro Mobile (Mx100) generation, released in 2013.

In contrast, the Intel UHD Graphics P750 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) built into the Rocket Lake chip. It uses the much newer Generation 12.1 architecture and is fabricated on Intel's 14 nm+++ process. The data does not list a transistor count or die size for the Intel part, but its architecture is a significant evolution over GCN 1.0. The Intel part is also end-of-life and belongs to the HD Graphics-W (Rocket Lake) generation.

A key architectural difference lies in the execution resources. The AMD FirePro M5100 has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 raster operation units (ROPs). The Intel UHD Graphics P750 has fewer shading units at 256, but a higher count of TMUs (64) and ROPs (32). This configuration suggests the Intel part is designed for higher pixel and texture fill rates, while the AMD part is designed for more complex shader computations. The Intel part also lists FP16 performance of 1,331.2 GFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, a capability not listed for the AMD part.

Memory configurations are another major divider. The FirePro M5100 uses a dedicated 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 72.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel P750 uses System Shared memory, with its bandwidth being System Dependent. This means the AMD part has dedicated, high-speed memory, while the Intel part must share system memory, which is a significant potential bottleneck for performance. The AMD part also has a higher base clock of 725 MHz and boost clock of 775 MHz, compared to the Intel's 350 MHz base and 1300 MHz boost. The AMD's memory clock is 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective).

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD FirePro M5100 has a higher score of 6830, which is 4.2% ahead of the Intel UHD Graphics P750's score of 6554.

Q: What are the main differences in memory architecture?

A: The AMD FirePro M5100 uses a dedicated 2 GB of GDDR5 memory with a 128-bit bus and 72.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel UHD Graphics P750 uses System Shared memory, with bandwidth that is System Dependent.

Q: Which GPU supports more modern graphics APIs?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics P750 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, which are more modern than the AMD FirePro M5100's DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: What is the difference in physical form factor?

A: The AMD FirePro M5100 is a discrete MXM Module with an MXM-A (3.0) bus interface. The Intel UHD Graphics P750 is an IGP (Integrated Graphics Processor) that connects via a Ring Bus.

Q: How do their power requirements differ?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics P750 has a specified TDP of 15 W. The AMD FirePro M5100 does not have a TDP listed in the data.

Q: How does the AMD FirePro M5100 compare to its nearest rival, the Radeon R7 M370?

A: The AMD FirePro M5100 is only 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 M370, which has an average score of 6764. This places the FirePro M5100 in a very tight performance cluster with several other mobile GPUs.

Specification Differences

The following table highlights the key specifications where the two GPUs differ, based solely on the provided data.

| Specification | AMD FirePro M5100 | Intel UHD Graphics P750 |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Generation 12.1 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm+++ |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 1,500 million | Not listed |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | Not listed |

| Base Clock | 725 MHz | 350 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 775 MHz | 1300 MHz |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 72.00 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading Units | 640 | 256 |

| TMUs | 40 | 64 |

| ROPs | 16 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 12.40 GPixel/s | 41.60 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 31.00 GTexel/s | 83.20 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 992.0 GFLOPS | 665.6 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | Not listed | 1,331.2 GFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | Not listed | 15 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | IGP |

| Bus Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | Ring Bus |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it results in a win for the AMD FirePro M5100.

• Geekbench OpenCL: The AMD FirePro M5100 scores 6830, while the Intel UHD Graphics P750 scores 6554. This gives the AMD part a 4.2% performance advantage. This score reflects the FirePro's superior FP32 compute capability of 992.0 GFLOPS compared to the Intel's 665.6 GFLOPS.

While the Intel part loses the compute benchmark, its architecture shows strengths in other theoretical areas. The Intel UHD Graphics P750 has a pixel rate of 41.60 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 83.20 GTexel/s. These figures are significantly higher than the AMD FirePro M5100's 12.40 GPixel/s and 31.00 GTexel/s, respectively. This indicates that the Intel part is architecturally better suited for fill-rate-limited tasks, even though its overall compute score is lower.

The benchmark data also places both GPUs in a similar competitive landscape. The FirePro M5100's nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M, scores 6946, which is 1.7% higher. The Intel P750's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon HD 7730M, scores 6581, which is 0.4% higher. This shows that while the FirePro M5100 is ahead of the P750, both are competing against a tight cluster of similar-performance mobile GPUs from the same era.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the benchmark and specification data, each GPU has a clear domain of superiority.

AMD FirePro M5100 Wins in Compute-Intensive Tasks. The 4.2% lead in the Geekbench OpenCL score is the primary indicator. This is backed by its significantly higher FP32 performance (992.0 GFLOPS vs 665.6 GFLOPS) and dedicated GDDR5 memory. The FirePro M5100 is the better choice for tasks like CAD, 3D rendering, and GPU-accelerated computing where raw shader throughput and dedicated memory bandwidth are critical. Its performance is closely matched with rivals like the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M, which is 1.7% faster, but it maintains a solid edge over the Intel part.

Intel UHD Graphics P750 Wins in Fill-Rate and Efficiency. The Intel part's advantages are clear in its pixel rate (41.60 GPixel/s vs 12.40 GPixel/s) and texture rate (83.20 GTexel/s vs 31.00 GTexel/s). This makes it theoretically stronger for tasks that are heavily dependent on texture fetching and pixel output, such as basic 2D compositing or certain video processing workloads. Furthermore, its 15 W TDP and IGP form factor make it the only viable choice for low-power, space-constrained systems. The Intel part also wins on software modernity, with support for DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, ensuring better compatibility with newer applications and games that rely on these APIs. It sits in a performance class with rivals like the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M, which it leads by 0.9%.