AMD FirePro M5100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M leads with an average benchmark score of 8135, while the AMD FirePro M5100 scores 6830. The GTX 950M sits at the 42nd percentile of all GPUs, the FirePro M5100 at the 38th.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference between the two?

A: The GTX 950M uses 4 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro M5100 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on the same 128-bit bus, but achieves 72.00 GB/s, more than double the bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has higher clock speeds?

A: The GTX 950M runs at a base clock of 993 MHz with a boost of 1124 MHz. The FirePro M5100 runs at 725 MHz base and 775 MHz boost, meaning the NVIDIA part has substantially higher operating frequencies.

Q: What are the compute unit counts?

A: Both GPUs have 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. This is one of the few specifications where the two are identical.

Q: Which GPU supports the newer DirectX version?

A: The AMD FirePro M5100 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M supports DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the NVIDIA part supports Vulkan 1.4 versus Vulkan 1.2.170 on the AMD part.

Q: What is the release timeline difference?

A: The AMD FirePro M5100 was released on 2013-10-15, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M came later on 2015-03-12. Both are end-of-life products.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data is unambiguous here. In the single head-to-head test recorded, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M wins outright. The GeForce GTX 950M scores 9745 in Geekbench OpenCL, versus 6830 for the FirePro M5100, a delta of 42.7%. That is not a narrow margin; it is a decisive advantage in raw compute throughput.

The GTX 950M also wins on aggregate metrics. Its average benchmark score of 8135 places it ahead of the FirePro M5100's 6830 by roughly 19%. The percentile rankings reinforce this: the NVIDIA part sits at the 42nd percentile of all GPUs, the AMD part at the 38th. For a mobile GPU pairing, the GTX 950M is the stronger performer across the board.

However, the FirePro M5100 does have a clear advantage in memory bandwidth. With GDDR5 memory running at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective), it delivers 72.00 GB/s, versus the GTX 950M's DDR3 at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), which yields only 28.80 GB/s. For workloads that are bandwidth-bound, such as certain compute tasks or high-resolution texture streaming, the AMD part has a structural edge. That said, the recorded benchmark does not show this translating into a win, as the GTX 950M's much higher clock speeds and overall compute output dominate.

In terms of synthetic compute, the GTX 950M wins every category measured. Its pixel rate is 17.98 GPixel/s versus 12.40 GPixel/s, its texture rate is 44.96 GTexel/s versus 31.00 GTexel/s, and its FP32 throughput is 1,438.7 GFLOPS versus 992.0 GFLOPS. The FirePro M5100's only theoretical advantage is memory bandwidth, which does not overcome the NVIDIA part's lead in every other metric.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and design philosophies. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M uses the GM107 chip built on the Maxwell architecture, part of the GeForce 900M generation. The AMD FirePro M5100 uses the Venus chip built on GCN 1.0, part of the FirePro Mobile (Mx100) generation.

Both are manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, which is the only major manufacturing similarity. The transistor counts differ: the GTX 950M packs 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, giving a density of 12.6M / mm². The FirePro M5100 has 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, with a density of 12.2M / mm². The NVIDIA chip is physically larger and denser, which aligns with its higher clock speeds and compute output.

The clock behavior is a key architectural differentiator. The GTX 950M runs at 993 MHz base and 1124 MHz boost, while the FirePro M5100 runs at 725 MHz base and 775 MHz boost. That is a roughly 37% higher base clock and 45% higher boost clock for the NVIDIA part. Given the identical shading unit counts, the clock advantage translates directly into higher throughput.

Memory architecture also differs significantly. The GTX 950M uses DDR3 at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), while the FirePro M5100 uses GDDR5 at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective). The AMD part's memory runs at a much higher effective speed, resulting in 72.00 GB/s of bandwidth versus 28.80 GB/s. This is a fundamental difference in how each GPU feeds its compute units.

The API support also reflects their respective ages and architectures. The GTX 950M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The FirePro M5100 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The AMD part has a slightly higher DirectX feature level, but the NVIDIA part has a newer Vulkan version.

Specification Differences

The specification tables show several clear divergences between the two GPUs. Clock speeds differ sharply: the GTX 950M's base clock is 993 MHz versus 725 MHz for the FirePro M5100, and boost clocks are 1124 MHz versus 775 MHz respectively. Memory size differs, with the GTX 950M carrying 4 GB of DDR3 versus the FirePro M5100's 2 GB of GDDR5. Memory bandwidth is a major split: 28.80 GB/s for the NVIDIA part versus 72.00 GB/s for the AMD part.

Compute rates follow the clock differences. The GTX 950M achieves 17.98 GPixel/s pixel rate, 44.96 GTexel/s texture rate, and 1,438.7 GFLOPS FP32. The FirePro M5100 achieves 12.40 GPixel/s, 31.00 GTexel/s, and 992.0 GFLOPS. The NVIDIA part leads by significant margins in all three.

Power and form factor differ as well. The GTX 950M has a TDP of 75 W and uses an IGP slot width with no power connectors. The FirePro M5100 has no listed TDP, uses an MXM Module slot width, and its power connectors are not specified. The bus interface also differs: PCIe 3.0 x8 for the GTX 950M versus MXM-A (3.0) for the FirePro M5100.

Shader counts are identical: 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs for both. This means all performance differences come from clocks, memory, and architecture, not from raw unit counts. The GTX 950M is the newer part, released 2015-03-12, while the FirePro M5100 came from 2013-10-15. Both are end-of-life and neither has a launch MSRP listed in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. The results are clear-cut. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M scores 9745, while the AMD FirePro M5100 scores 6830. The winner is the GTX 950M by a delta of 42.7%. This is the only recorded comparison, and it is a dominant one.

To contextualize this score, look at the nearest rivals for each GPU. The GTX 950M's closest competitor is the AMD Radeon R9 M360, which scores 8129, just 0.1% behind. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 scores 8167, 0.4% ahead. The GTX 950M effectively sits in a tight cluster of GPUs in the 8100 to 8170 range, meaning its 9745 OpenCL score is notably above its average benchmark score of 8135.

The FirePro M5100's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R7 M370 at 6764 (1% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M at 6946 (1.7% ahead), and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 at 6698 (2% behind). The FirePro's average score of 6830 places it in a lower performance tier than the GTX 950M, and its single OpenCL score matches that average exactly.

The 42.7% delta in the head-to-head test is the single most important number in this comparison. It shows that in raw compute performance, the GTX 950M is not just slightly better; it is substantially faster. Even accounting for the FirePro M5100's higher memory bandwidth, the OpenCL benchmark does not show the AMD part closing the gap. The GTX 950M wins the head-to-head with 1 win to 0.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M is the stronger GPU for general compute and benchmark performance. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 9745 versus 6830 is a 42.7% advantage, and its average benchmark score of 8135 versus 6830 places it nearly 20% ahead. The GTX 950M wins on pixel rate, texture rate, FP32 throughput, and has double the memory capacity at 4 GB versus 2 GB.

The AMD FirePro M5100's main strength is memory bandwidth. At 72.00 GB/s, it offers more than double the GTX 950M's 28.80 GB/s. This could matter in bandwidth-sensitive workloads, but the recorded benchmarks do not reflect any win for the AMD part. Its lower clocks (725 MHz base, 775 MHz boost) and lower compute rates (992.0 GFLOPS FP32 versus 1,438.7 GFLOPS) hold it back.

For users choosing between these two, the decision depends on what matters more. If the priority is raw compute performance, benchmark scores, or higher memory capacity, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M is the pick. If the priority is memory bandwidth for specific bandwidth-bound tasks, the FirePro M5100 has a structural advantage, though no recorded benchmark shows it converting that into a performance win.

The GTX 950M also has the newer release date and a higher percentile ranking (42nd versus 38th). Its Vulkan support is newer (1.4 versus 1.2.170), though the FirePro M5100 has a slightly higher DirectX feature level (11_1 versus 11_0). Both are end-of-life products, but the NVIDIA part is the more capable one by the recorded data. The verdict is straightforward: for anyone weighing these two in the database, the GeForce GTX 950M is the higher-performance option, and the FirePro M5100 should only be considered if memory bandwidth is the dominant requirement.