AMD FirePro M6100 vs AMD Radeon Pro 555X Comparison

The AMD FirePro M6100 and AMD Radeon Pro 555X are two mobile workstation GPUs from different AMD generations, and the benchmark data shows they land in the same performance tier despite their architectural differences. The FirePro M6100, built on GCN 2.0, and the Radeon Pro 555X, built on GCN 4.0, both sit at the 54th percentile among all GPUs, with average benchmark scores of 13354 and 13321 respectively. This puts them within a fraction of a percent of each other, making the choice between them far more nuanced than a simple performance ranking.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the only head-to-head benchmark available?

A: The AMD FirePro M6100 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 13354, beating the Radeon Pro 555X's 12628 by 5.7%. This is the sole direct benchmark comparison in the data.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The FirePro M6100 averages 13354, while the Radeon Pro 555X averages 13321. In the nearest rivals list, the FirePro M6100 is shown as 0.3% ahead of the 555X, while the 555X is listed as 0.2% behind the FirePro M6100.

Q: What is the difference in memory capacity and bandwidth?

A: The Radeon Pro 555X has double the memory capacity at 4 GB, compared to 2 GB on the FirePro M6100. However, the FirePro M6100 has slightly higher memory bandwidth at 96.00 GB/s versus 94.08 GB/s on the 555X, despite the 555X's faster effective memory clock (5.9 Gbps vs 6 Gbps).

Q: Which GPU has more shading units and texture mapping units?

A: The FirePro M6100 has 896 shading units and 56 TMUs, while the Radeon Pro 555X has 768 shading units and 48 TMUs. Both GPUs share the same 16 ROPs.

Q: What are the process node and transistor differences?

A: The FirePro M6100 uses a 28 nm process at TSMC with 2,080 million transistors on a 160 mm² die. The Radeon Pro 555X uses a smaller 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries with 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die.

Q: Which GPU has better API support in terms of Vulkan version?

A: The Radeon Pro 555X supports Vulkan 1.3, while the FirePro M6100 supports Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support DirectX 12 (12_0) and OpenGL 4.6.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent distinct architectural generations from AMD. The FirePro M6100 is based on GCN 2.0 with the Emerald chip, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. Its transistor count is 2,080 million, packed into a 160 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.0M per mm². The Radeon Pro 555X moves to GCN 4.0 with the Polaris 21 chip, produced on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. This newer process allows 3,000 million transistors in a smaller 123 mm² die, achieving a much higher density of 24.4M per mm².

The architectural shift brings notable changes in compute resources. The FirePro M6100 fields 896 shading units and 56 TMUs, whereas the Radeon Pro 555X has fewer of both, with 768 shading units and 48 TMUs. Both share 16 ROPs, so pixel throughput differences stem from clock behavior. The FirePro M6100 achieves a pixel rate of 17.60 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 61.60 GTexel/s, while the Radeon Pro 555X delivers 14.51 GPixel/s and 43.54 GTexel/s. In floating-point performance, the FirePro M6100 reaches 1.971 TFLOPS FP32, which is substantially higher than the Radeon Pro 555X's 1,393.2 GFLOPS FP32—the 555X does offer FP16 at the same 1,393.2 GFLOPS rate with a 1:1 ratio, a feature the FirePro M6100 lacks.

Memory architecture also diverges. The FirePro M6100 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, with memory clocked at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) for 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon Pro 555X has 4 GB of GDDR5 on the same 128-bit bus, but memory runs at 1470 MHz (5.9 Gbps effective), resulting in slightly lower bandwidth at 94.08 GB/s. The newer GCN 4.0 architecture also brings Vulkan 1.3 support, compared to Vulkan 1.2.170 on the older GCN 2.0 part, while DirectX 12 (12_0) and OpenGL 4.6 support are identical.

Where Each One Wins

The FirePro M6100 wins in raw compute throughput. Its higher shading unit count and clock rates give it clear advantages in pixel rate (17.60 vs 14.51 GPixel/s), texture rate (61.60 vs 43.54 GTexel/s), and FP32 performance (1.971 TFLOPS vs 1,393.2 GFLOPS). The data also shows it winning the only direct benchmark comparison, the Geekbench OpenCL test, by 5.7%. This makes it the stronger choice for OpenCL-based workloads that can leverage its higher compute ceiling.

The Radeon Pro 555X wins on memory capacity and process efficiency. Its 4 GB frame buffer doubles the FirePro M6100's 2 GB, which matters for larger datasets or higher-resolution textures that exceed 2 GB. It also uses a more advanced 14 nm process with higher transistor density (24.4M / mm² vs 13.0M / mm²), and it is the only one of the two with a listed TDP at 75 W. The 555X also supports newer API features through Vulkan 1.3, and it offers FP16 compute at a 1:1 ratio, which the FirePro M6100 does not provide.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every major specification category. The FirePro M6100 uses the Emerald chip on GCN 2.0 architecture, while the Radeon Pro 555X uses Polaris 21 on GCN 4.0. Process nodes differ: 28 nm at TSMC for the M6100 versus 14 nm at GlobalFoundries for the 555X. Transistor counts are 2,080 million versus 3,000 million, with die sizes of 160 mm² versus 123 mm², leading to densities of 13.0M / mm² versus 24.4M / mm².

Compute resources: the FirePro M6100 has 896 shading units and 56 TMUs, while the Radeon Pro 555X has 768 shading units and 48 TMUs—both have 16 ROPs. Memory differs in capacity (2 GB vs 4 GB) and bandwidth (96.00 GB/s vs 94.08 GB/s), though both use GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. Memory clocks are 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) versus 1470 MHz (5.9 Gbps effective). Pixel rate is 17.60 GPixel/s versus 14.51 GPixel/s, texture rate is 61.60 GTexel/s versus 43.54 GTexel/s, and FP32 is 1.971 TFLOPS versus 1,393.2 GFLOPS. The 555X adds FP16 at 1,393.2 GFLOPS (1:1), which the M6100 lacks.

Form factor and interface differ: the FirePro M6100 is an MXM Module with an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface, while the Radeon Pro 555X is an IGP with a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface. Both have no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs. TDP is listed only for the 555X at 75 W. API support matches on DirectX and OpenGL, but Vulkan differs: 1.2.170 for the M6100 versus 1.3 for the 555X. Release dates are also different: the FirePro M6100 launched in 2014, while the Radeon Pro 555X launched in 2018.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison is Geekbench OpenCL, where the FirePro M6100 scores 13354 against the Radeon Pro 555X's 12628. That is a 5.7% advantage for the older FirePro part, a significant margin in a single benchmark. This result aligns with the theoretical compute advantage—the FirePro M6100's FP32 throughput of 1.971 TFLOPS is roughly 41% higher than the 555X's 1,393.2 GFLOPS, and its texture rate of 61.60 GTexel/s is about 41% higher than 43.54 GTexel/s.

However, the Radeon Pro 555X shows stronger results in other API benchmarks. It scores 14479 in Geekbench Metal and 12855 in Geekbench Vulkan, both above its OpenCL score of 12628. The FirePro M6100 has no Metal or Vulkan benchmark scores in the data, so cross-API comparisons are impossible. What the data does show is that the 555X's average benchmark score of 13321 is very close to the M6100's 13354, despite the OpenCL gap. The nearest rivals data confirms this tight grouping: the FirePro M6100 is 0.3% ahead of the 555X, while the 555X is 0.2% behind the M6100. Both GPUs sit near the AMD Radeon HD 8950M (13376) and AMD Radeon RX 5500M (13356), all within a 0.4% band of each other.

The wins tally reflects this: the FirePro M6100 has 1 win in head-to-head benchmarks, and the Radeon Pro 555X has 0. But the overall average scores tell a story of near-parity, with the FirePro M6100's lead in OpenCL offset by the 555X's performance in Metal and Vulkan, where it posts higher scores (14479 and 12855) than its own OpenCL result.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but narrow choice. The AMD FirePro M6100 wins the only direct benchmark, and it holds decisive theoretical advantages in shading units, texture units, pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 compute. For OpenCL-heavy workloads, the 5.7% lead in Geekbench OpenCL and the 1.971 TFLOPS FP32 ceiling make it the stronger compute performer. Its 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, while slightly higher than the 555X's 94.08 GB/s, is not a meaningful differentiator.

The AMD Radeon Pro 555X, however, brings genuine advantages that the FirePro M6100 cannot match. Its 4 GB memory capacity is double, which is critical for workloads that push past 2 GB of usage. It offers Vulkan 1.3 support versus 1.2.170, and it has FP16 compute at a 1:1 ratio, enabling certain optimized workflows that the FirePro M6100 cannot accelerate. Its 14 nm process with 3,000 million transistors in a smaller die also indicates a more modern design, and it has a stated 75 W TDP.

For a builder choosing between these two, the decision hinges on workload type. If the priority is raw OpenCL compute power and the workload fits within 2 GB of memory, the FirePro M6100 is the better pick—it wins the benchmark and has superior theoretical throughput. If the workload requires more than 2 GB of memory, benefits from Vulkan 1.3 features, or can leverage FP16, the Radeon Pro 555X is the practical choice despite its lower compute numbers. Performance parity in average scores (13354 vs 13321) means neither GPU is a poor option, but the FirePro M6100's benchmark win and compute advantage give it the edge in pure performance, while the 555X's memory capacity and newer feature set make it the more versatile card.