AMD FirePro M5100 vs NVIDIA T600 Comparison

The NVIDIA T600 and AMD FirePro M5100 represent two distinct eras of workstation graphics, and the benchmark data reflects a decisive generational gap. The T600, built on Turing architecture, posts an average benchmark score of 7035, placing it in the 39th percentile of all GPUs. The FirePro M5100, using the older GCN 1.0 architecture, averages 6830, sitting at the 38th percentile. While their overall percentile rankings are nearly identical, the head-to-head benchmark results reveal a dramatic performance disparity, with the T600 winning the only shared test by a staggering margin.

Where Each One Wins

The data presents a clear-cut case: the NVIDIA T600 dominates the only benchmark where both products have recorded scores. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the T600 achieves 27875 points, while the FirePro M5100 manages only 6830. This represents a 308.1% advantage for the T600, making it the unequivocal winner in compute workloads that leverage OpenCL. There is no benchmark in the dataset where the FirePro M5100 comes out ahead, as it records zero wins in the head-to-head comparison.

The T600 also has a broader benchmark footprint, with results across nine different tests, including Passmark DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12, as well as G2D, G3D, and GPU compute tests. Its Passmark G3D score of 6479 indicates solid general 3D rendering performance. The FirePro M5100, by contrast, only has a single recorded benchmark result, limiting the scope of direct comparison. For users relying on OpenCL compute tasks, the T600 is the only viable choice based on the available data. The FirePro M5100, while it may have been adequate in its era, cannot compete with the newer architecture in any measured workload.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial and explains the performance chasm. The NVIDIA T600 is built on the Turing architecture using a 12 nm process at TSMC, packing 4,700 million transistors onto a 200 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 23.5 million per square millimeter. In contrast, the AMD FirePro M5100 uses the older GCN 1.0 architecture on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC, with just 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, yielding a density of 12.2 million per square millimeter. The T600's process advantage alone allows for significantly more complexity and efficiency.

Memory configurations also diverge sharply. The T600 comes with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro M5100 offers only 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, also on a 128-bit bus, but with a much lower 72.00 GB/s bandwidth. The T600's memory clock runs at 1250 MHz with 10 Gbps effective speed, while the M5100's memory runs at 1125 MHz with 4.5 Gbps effective speed. This bandwidth difference is critical for texture-heavy workloads and large data sets.

Both GPUs share the same number of shading units (640) and texture mapping units (40), but the T600 has double the raster operations pipelines (32 vs 16). Consequently, the T600's pixel rate is 42.72 GPixel/s versus 12.40 GPixel/s for the M5100, and its texture rate is 53.40 GTexel/s versus 31.00 GTexel/s. The T600 also supports FP16 compute at 3.418 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the M5100 has no FP16 capability listed. The T600's FP32 output is 1.709 TFLOPS, compared to 992.0 GFLOPS for the M5100. API support also differs, with the T600 offering DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the M5100 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole head-to-head benchmark is Geekbench OpenCL, and it is a one-sided affair. The NVIDIA T600 scores 27875, while the AMD FirePro M5100 scores 6830, giving the T600 a 308.1% lead. This is not a marginal victory; it is a four-fold difference in raw compute performance. To put this in perspective, the T600's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970, which has an average score of 7157 and is 1.7% slower than the T600. The FirePro M5100's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M at 6946, which is 1.7% faster than the M5100, and the AMD Radeon R7 M370 at 6764, which is 1% slower.

The delta between the two cards in this test is larger than the delta between the T600 and any of its nearest rivals. The T600 outperforms its closest competitor, the GTX 970, by only 1.7%, but it outperforms the M5100 by over 300%. This suggests that the M5100 is not just a generation behind; it is operating in an entirely different performance class. The OpenCL result alone accounts for the T600's higher average benchmark score of 7035 versus 6830 for the M5100, despite the fact that the T600 has several additional benchmark scores that could potentially drag its average down. The T600's Passmark scores, while not directly compared, show a balanced profile, with a G3D score of 6479 and a GPU compute score of 2402, indicating that its OpenCL dominance is not an isolated anomaly.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA T600 has an average benchmark score of 7035, placing it in the 39th percentile of all GPUs. The AMD FirePro M5100 has an average score of 6830, placing it in the 38th percentile.

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA T600 in OpenCL compute?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA T600 scores 27875, while the AMD FirePro M5100 scores 6830. This gives the T600 a 308.1% advantage, meaning it is roughly four times faster.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The NVIDIA T600 has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 160.0 GB/s. The AMD FirePro M5100 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 72.00 GB/s.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The NVIDIA T600 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the AMD FirePro M5100 supports DirectX 12 (11_1). The T600 also supports a newer Vulkan version (1.4) compared to the M5100's Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: How many shading units does each GPU have?

A: Both the NVIDIA T600 and the AMD FirePro M5100 have 640 shading units and 40 texture mapping units. However, the T600 has 32 ROPs, double the 16 ROPs found on the M5100.

Q: What is the transistor count difference between the two?

A: The NVIDIA T600 contains 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die using a 12 nm process. The AMD FirePro M5100 contains 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die using a 28 nm process.

The Verdict

The data unequivocally favors the NVIDIA T600 for any workload where compute performance matters. Its 308.1% lead in OpenCL is a decisive factor, making the FirePro M5100 non-competitive in modern compute tasks. The T600's superior memory bandwidth (160.0 GB/s vs 72.00 GB/s), higher pixel rate (42.72 GPixel/s vs 12.40 GPixel/s), and double the ROPs (32 vs 16) all contribute to a fundamentally more capable processor. The M5100's only advantage is its portability, as it is an MXM module, whereas the T600 is a single-slot card. However, for raw performance, the T600 is the clear winner.

Professionals working with OpenCL-accelerated applications should choose the NVIDIA T600 without hesitation. The data shows that the T600 also has a more complete feature set, including FP16 support and a newer DirectX version. The FirePro M5100, with its single benchmark score and older GCN 1.0 architecture, appears suited only for legacy systems where its MXM form factor is required. In any direct performance comparison, the T600 is the only rational choice based on the benchmark results.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA T600 | AMD FirePro M5100 |

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

| Architecture | Turing | GCN 1.0 |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 4,700 million | 1,500 million |

| Die Size | 200 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 23.5M / mm² | 12.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 735 MHz | 725 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1335 MHz | 775 MHz |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Clock | 1250 MHz / 10 Gbps effective | 1125 MHz / 4.5 Gbps effective |

| Memory Bandwidth | 160.0 GB/s | 72.00 GB/s |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 42.72 GPixel/s | 12.40 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 53.40 GTexel/s | 31.00 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 1.709 TFLOPS | 992.0 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 3.418 TFLOPS (2:1) | null |

| TDP | 40 W | null |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | MXM Module |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-A (3.0) |

| Display Outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a | Portable Device Dependent |

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.2.170 |

| Release Date | 2021-04-11 | 2013-10-15 |