AMD FirePro M5100 vs NVIDIA GeForce MX230 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains a single direct comparison between these two mobile graphics solutions, and it is a decisive one. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD FirePro M5100 scores 6,830 points, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 manages 5,739 points. That is a 19% advantage for the AMD part, a substantial margin in raw compute throughput.

This result places the FirePro M5100 in a favorable position relative to its own peer group. It sits 1% above the AMD Radeon R7 M370 (6,764 points) and 2% above the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 (6,698 points). Against the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M, the FirePro trails by 1.7%, and it is 2.1% behind the AMD Radeon R5 M240 (6,975 points). The picture is consistent: the FirePro M5100 operates in a tight cluster of mid-range mobile parts, with no extreme swings in either direction.

The MX230, by contrast, shows a different competitive landscape. Its OpenCL score of 5,739 places it essentially level with the NVIDIA RTX A400 (6,078 points, a 0% delta) and the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 (6,049 points, a 0.5% delta). It is 0.7% behind the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 (6,117 points) and 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon 760M (6,019 points). The MX230's average benchmark score across its two recorded tests, OpenCL and Vulkan, is 6,077 points, pulled upward by its Vulkan result of 6,414 points.

The Vulkan score is notable because the FirePro M5100 has no recorded Vulkan benchmark in the database. This means the MX230 demonstrates capability in a modern graphics API that the older AMD part cannot match in the recorded data. While the OpenCL gap favors AMD by 19%, the MX230's Vulkan showing suggests it has strengths in newer workloads that the comparison table does not capture.

The percentile rankings reinforce the overall picture. The FirePro M5100 sits at the 38th percentile of all GPUs, while the MX230 rests at the 35th percentile. These are close positions, but the FirePro's higher percentile aligns with its higher OpenCL score. The MX230's average score of 6,077, when compared to the FirePro's single score of 6,830, shows a 12% gap in favor of the AMD part across all recorded benchmarks.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different manufacturing generations and design philosophies. The AMD FirePro M5100 is built on GCN 1.0 architecture, using the Venus chip on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA GeForce MX230 uses Pascal architecture with the GP108 chip on a 14 nm process at Samsung. The process node difference is significant: 14 nm versus 28 nm, which directly impacts transistor density.

The database shows the MX230 packs 1,800 million transistors into a 74 mm² die, yielding a density of 24.3 million transistors per square millimeter. The FirePro M5100 contains 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, for a density of 12.2 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA part is nearly twice as dense, a direct consequence of the more advanced manufacturing process.

Shader configuration differs markedly. The FirePro M5100 has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation units. The MX230 has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Despite having fewer cores, the MX230 achieves a higher pixel rate: 24.50 GPixel/s versus 12.40 GPixel/s for the AMD part. This is a 98% advantage in pixel throughput, driven by the much higher clock speeds on the NVIDIA chip.

Clock speeds tell a clear story. The MX230 runs at a base of 1,519 MHz and boosts to 1,531 MHz. The FirePro M5100 operates at 725 MHz base and 775 MHz boost. The NVIDIA part runs at more than double the clock rate. However, the FirePro's larger core count compensates in raw floating-point performance: 992.0 GFLOPS FP32 versus 783.9 GFLOPS for the MX230, a 27% advantage for AMD.

Memory subsystems also diverge. Both use 2 GB of GDDR5, but the FirePro M5100 has a 128-bit bus delivering 72.00 GB/s of bandwidth, while the MX230 has a 64-bit bus delivering 48.06 GB/s. The AMD part offers 50% more memory bandwidth. The MX230 runs its memory at 1,502 MHz (6 Gbps effective), while the FirePro runs at 1,125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective), but the wider bus on the AMD part wins on overall throughput.

The MX230 has a recorded TDP of 10 W and uses an IGP form factor with no power connectors. The FirePro M5100 has no TDP listed in the database, but it uses an MXM module slot width, indicating a larger, more power-hungry design. The MX230 also supports PCIe 3.0 x4, while the FirePro uses MXM-A (3.0) bus interface.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro M5100 scores 6,830 points in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 19% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce MX230's 5,739 points.

Q: Does the MX230 have any benchmark advantage over the FirePro M5100?

A: The MX230 has a recorded Geekbench Vulkan score of 6,414 points. The FirePro M5100 has no Vulkan benchmark in the database, so the MX230 is the only one of the two with demonstrated Vulkan performance.

Q: How do their memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The FirePro M5100 offers 72.00 GB/s of bandwidth from a 128-bit bus, while the MX230 offers 48.06 GB/s from a 64-bit bus. The AMD part has 50% more bandwidth.

Q: What are the pixel rate differences?

A: The MX230 achieves 24.50 GPixel/s, which is nearly double the FirePro M5100's 12.40 GPixel/s, despite the AMD part having more shading units.

Q: Which GPU has the higher transistor density?

A: The MX230 has a transistor density of 24.3M per mm², versus 12.2M per mm² for the FirePro M5100, due to its 14 nm process compared to 28 nm.

Q: What is the FP32 floating-point performance for each?

A: The FirePro M5100 delivers 992.0 GFLOPS, which is 27% higher than the MX230's 783.9 GFLOPS.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FirePro M5100 | NVIDIA GeForce MX230 |

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

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Pascal |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Samsung |

| Transistors | 1,500 million | 1,800 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 74 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.2M / mm² | 24.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 725 MHz | 1,519 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 775 MHz | 1,531 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1,125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) | 1,502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 72.00 GB/s | 48.06 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 640 | 256 |

| TMUs | 40 | 16 |

| ROPs | 16 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 12.40 GPixel/s | 24.50 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 31.00 GTexel/s | 24.50 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 992.0 GFLOPS | 783.9 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | Not listed | 12.25 GFLOPS (1:64) |

| TDP | Not listed | 10 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | IGP |

| Power Connectors | Not listed | None |

| Bus Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x4 |

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2013-10-15 | 2019-02-20 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | End-of-life |

The release dates show a five-year gap, with the FirePro launching in October 2013 and the MX230 in February 2019. The MX230 supports a newer DirectX version (12_1 versus 11_1) and a newer Vulkan version (1.4 versus 1.2.170). The FirePro lists its predecessor as FirePro Mobility and successor as Radeon Pro Mobile, while the MX230 has no recorded predecessor or successor.

The Verdict

The data points to a split decision that depends on workload. For raw compute throughput, as measured by OpenCL, the AMD FirePro M5100 is the clear winner with a 19% advantage over the MX230. It also leads in FP32 performance by 27% and offers 50% more memory bandwidth. These are meaningful margins for compute-oriented tasks.

However, the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 wins on architectural modernity and efficiency. It runs on a 14 nm process, has double the transistor density, and operates at more than double the clock speed. Its pixel rate is 98% higher, which benefits rasterization-heavy workloads. The MX230 also has a recorded Vulkan score, something the FirePro lacks entirely, and it supports a newer DirectX version.

The percentile rankings favor the FirePro slightly, at 38th versus 35th. The MX230's average score of 6,077 across two tests still trails the FirePro's single OpenCL score of 6,830. For users prioritizing compute performance, the FirePro M5100 is the data-supported choice. For those prioritizing newer API support and pixel throughput, the MX230 holds advantages.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro M5100 wins in scenarios that demand raw compute and memory bandwidth. Its 992.0 GFLOPS FP32 output, 72.00 GB/s bandwidth, and 19% OpenCL lead over the MX230 make it better suited for general-purpose GPU compute tasks, such as OpenCL-accelerated applications. Its 640 shading units provide a wider parallel execution footprint. The 31.00 GTexel/s texture rate also exceeds the MX230's 24.50 GTexel/s, giving it an edge in texture-heavy workloads.

The NVIDIA GeForce MX230 wins in scenarios that benefit from high pixel throughput and modern API support. Its 24.50 GPixel/s pixel rate is nearly double the FirePro's 12.40 GPixel/s, making it more effective for pixel-bound rendering. The 14 nm process, 10 W TDP, and IGP form factor suggest it is better suited for power-constrained, thin-and-light designs. Its Vulkan 1.4 support and DirectX 12_1 capability give it access to newer graphics features that the FirePro cannot match.

The MX230's clock speeds, 1,519 MHz base and 1,531 MHz boost, indicate a design optimized for burst performance in short-duration workloads. The FirePro's lower clocks but wider memory bus point toward sustained, bandwidth-intensive compute. The database shows one head-to-head win for the FirePro and zero for the MX230, but the MX230's Vulkan score and pixel rate provide counterbalancing evidence for different use cases. Users should weigh compute performance against modern API support and efficiency based on their specific application needs.