AMD FirePro M5100 vs NVIDIA Quadro K620 Comparison

The AMD FirePro M5100 and NVIDIA Quadro K620 are both end-of-life professional workstation graphics cards, but they represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The data shows a narrow overall victory for the AMD part in the single available benchmark, but a closer look at the specifications reveals why each card exists and which user it was designed for. This analysis will dissect the benchmark numbers and architectural decisions to determine the practical strengths of each.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it is a close contest. The AMD FirePro M5100 scores 6830 points, while the NVIDIA Quadro K620 scores 6693 points. This results in a 2% delta in favor of the AMD card. While a win is a win, a 2% difference in a synthetic compute workload is marginal and could easily be attributed to driver optimizations or thermal conditions rather than a fundamental performance advantage.

To put these scores into perspective, the FirePro M5100 sits at the 38th percentile of all GPUs, while the Quadro K620 is at the 36th percentile. This places both cards in the same performance tier, firmly in the entry-level segment of the market. Looking at the nearest rivals for the AMD card reinforces this position. It is just 1% faster than the AMD Radeon R7 M370 and 2% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010. Conversely, it trails the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M by 1.7% and the AMD Radeon R5 M240 by 2.1%.

The Quadro K620’s rival list is more curious. Its average benchmark score of 6282 is dragged down by a separate Vulkan score of 5870, which is significantly lower than its OpenCL score of 6693. Its OpenCL result places it within 0.2% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102, which are historically much more powerful cards. This suggests that in this specific OpenCL workload, the K620 is performing at an unexpectedly high level relative to its generation, or that those modern cards have poor OpenCL optimization. The K620 also trails the AMD Radeon R7 M350 by 0.7% and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100 by 0.8%.

The data indicates a statistical tie. The 2% lead for the AMD FirePro M5100 in OpenCL is real but small. The Quadro K620 has a lower average score due to its Vulkan result, but in the shared test, the two are nearly inseparable. The verdict from the numbers is that neither card holds a decisive compute advantage over the other in this single metric.

Architecture Differences

The most significant differences between these two cards are not in their benchmark scores but in their underlying design. The AMD FirePro M5100 is built on the GCN 1.0 architecture using the Venus chip, while the NVIDIA Quadro K620 uses the Maxwell architecture with the GM107 chip. Both are fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but the chip designs diverge dramatically.

The AMD chip contains 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, while the NVIDIA chip has 1,870 million transistors on a larger 148 mm² die. This makes the NVIDIA chip more complex, but the AMD chip has a slightly higher transistor density at 12.2 million per mm² versus 12.6 million per mm². The architectural philosophy is clear: AMD's GCN is a compute-first design with a wide 640 shading units, while NVIDIA's Maxwell focuses on efficiency and higher clock speeds with only 384 shading units.

The clock speeds tell the rest of the story. The FirePro M5100 runs at a base of 725 MHz with a boost of 775 MHz. The Quadro K620 runs much faster, with a base of 1058 MHz and a boost of 1124 MHz. This 45% higher clock speed on the NVIDIA card is the reason it can nearly match the AMD card in raw compute despite having 40% fewer shading units. The FP32 performance reflects this: the AMD card delivers 992.0 GFLOPS, while the NVIDIA card delivers 863.2 GFLOPS. AMD still holds the raw compute lead, but NVIDIA closes the gap significantly through sheer clock speed.

The memory subsystems are where the cards diverge for different use cases. The FirePro M5100 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding 72.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro K620 also has 2 GB of memory, but it uses DDR3 on the same 128-bit bus, resulting in only 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a massive difference—the AMD card has 150% more memory bandwidth than the NVIDIA card. This will make the FirePro significantly faster in any workload that is memory-bandwidth bound, such as texture-heavy rendering or large compute datasets. The Quadro K620’s lower bandwidth is its primary weakness.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The AMD FirePro M5100 wins with a score of 6830, compared to the NVIDIA Quadro K620’s 6693 points. This represents a 2% performance advantage for the AMD card.

Q: Is the NVIDIA Quadro K620 a better card for gaming due to its higher clock speed?

A: The data does not support a gaming conclusion. While the K620 has a higher boost clock of 1124 MHz versus 775 MHz on the FirePro, its memory bandwidth is far lower at 28.80 GB/s versus 72.00 GB/s. The benchmark data only includes compute tests, not gaming performance.

Q: Why does the Quadro K620 have a lower average benchmark score than its OpenCL score?

A: The K620 has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 5870, which is significantly lower than its OpenCL score of 6693. This Vulkan result pulls its average score down to 6282, while the AMD card has only an OpenCL score, resulting in an average of 6830.

Q: How do these cards compare to modern GPUs in the benchmark database?

A: Both cards are in the lower percentile range, with the FirePro M5100 at the 38th percentile and the Quadro K620 at the 36th percentile. The K620’s OpenCL score is within 0.2% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER, but this is likely a workload-specific result rather than an indication of overall performance parity.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two cards?

A: The AMD FirePro M5100 has a memory bandwidth of 72.00 GB/s using GDDR5 memory. The NVIDIA Quadro K620 has a memory bandwidth of 28.80 GB/s using DDR3 memory. The AMD card has a 150% higher bandwidth.

Q: Are these cards from the same generation?

A: No. The AMD FirePro M5100 was released on 2013-10-15, while the NVIDIA Quadro K620 was released on 2014-07-21. They are from different generations, with the AMD card being from the FirePro Mobile (Mx100) generation and the NVIDIA card from the Quadro Kepler (Kx200) generation.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear profile for each card, but the winner depends entirely on the workload. In the single available compute benchmark, the AMD FirePro M5100 is the winner with a 2% lead. If the analysis is strictly about raw compute performance in OpenCL, the AMD card is the better choice.

However, the architectural differences suggest a more nuanced conclusion. The AMD card has a massive advantage in memory bandwidth (72.00 GB/s versus 28.80 GB/s) and a higher FP32 throughput (992.0 GFLOPS versus 863.2 GFLOPS). This makes it the superior card for compute-heavy tasks that saturate memory bandwidth or require high shader throughput. The NVIDIA card, despite its higher clock speeds, cannot overcome its memory bottleneck in these scenarios.

The NVIDIA Quadro K620 is not without merit. Its higher clock speeds and smaller die size (148 mm² versus 123 mm²) suggest a more efficient design for its time. Its single-slot form factor and lack of power connectors make it easier to integrate into a workstation, but this is a physical attribute, not a performance one. The data indicates that the K620 is a capable card for its generation, but it is not the best choice for raw compute performance.

The final verdict from the data is that the AMD FirePro M5100 is the better card for compute performance. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark and has superior memory bandwidth and FP32 performance. The NVIDIA Quadro K620 is more of a general-purpose workstation card, but in the specific metrics available, it is second place. The 2% benchmark win, combined with the 150% memory bandwidth advantage, makes the AMD FirePro M5100 the clear choice for users who prioritize compute workloads.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every core specification. The chip design is the first major divergence, with the AMD Venus chip using GCN 1.0 architecture and the NVIDIA GM107 using Maxwell. The AMD card has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, while the NVIDIA card has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The clock speeds are also different, with the AMD card running at 725 MHz base and 775 MHz boost, while the NVIDIA card runs at 1058 MHz base and 1124 MHz boost.

The memory systems are completely different. The AMD FirePro M5100 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 with a 128-bit bus and 72.00 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA Quadro K620 uses 2 GB of DDR3 with a 128-bit bus and 28.80 GB/s bandwidth. The performance metrics follow these differences: the AMD card has a pixel rate of 12.40 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 31.00 GTexel/s, while the NVIDIA card has a pixel rate of 17.98 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 26.98 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 992.0 GFLOPS for AMD and 863.2 GFLOPS for NVIDIA.

The physical and interface specifications also differ. The AMD card uses an MXM Module slot width with an MXM-A (3.0) bus interface, while the NVIDIA card is a Single-slot card with a PCIe 2.0 x16 interface. The NVIDIA card has a TDP of 45 W and a suggested PSU of 200 W, while the AMD card has no TDP listed. The NVIDIA card has specific display outputs (1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort 1.2), while the AMD card’s outputs are listed as portable device dependent. The NVIDIA card also has physical dimensions of 160 mm in length and 69 mm in height, while the AMD card has no listed dimensions.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro M5100 wins in every compute-related category from the data. It has a higher OpenCL benchmark score (6830 versus 6693), higher memory bandwidth (72.00 GB/s versus 28.80 GB/s), higher FP32 performance (992.0 GFLOPS versus 863.2 GFLOPS), and more shading units (640 versus 384). This makes it the clear winner for tasks like OpenCL compute, scientific simulations, and any workload that benefits from high memory bandwidth or raw shader throughput.

The NVIDIA Quadro K620 wins in specific hardware attributes. It has a higher boost clock (1124 MHz versus 775 MHz) and a higher pixel rate (17.98 GPixel/s versus 12.40 GPixel/s). This suggests it might have an edge in pixel-fill-rate-bound tasks, though the lack of benchmark data prevents a definitive confirmation. It also has a lower TDP at 45 W, making it more power-efficient, and it has a more conventional desktop form factor with a single-slot design and PCIe 2.0 x16 interface.

For the intended use cases, the AMD card is better suited for mobile workstations that require high compute throughput, given its MXM module form factor. The NVIDIA card is better suited for desktop workstations that need a low-power, single-slot solution with predictable display outputs. The data supports the AMD card for compute, but the NVIDIA card’s higher clock speeds and pixel rate make it a better choice for traditional 2D or light 3D professional graphics workloads. The final split from the numbers is that the AMD FirePro M5100 is the compute champion, while the NVIDIA Quadro K620 is the efficiency-oriented desktop workstation card.