AMD FirePro M6100 vs AMD Radeon R9 M380 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data splits cleanly between these two mobile GPUs. The AMD FirePro M6100 wins the only directly comparable test in the database, the Geekbench OpenCL workload, with a score of 13354 against the AMD Radeon R9 M380's 12565. That is a 5.9% advantage for the FirePro part. The R9 M380, however, has an additional benchmark entry that the FirePro lacks: a Geekbench Metal score of 18476. That Metal result lifts its average benchmark score to 15521, while the FirePro's average sits at 13354.

This creates an interesting split. In pure OpenCL compute, the FirePro M6100 is the stronger part. In the broader average score that includes the Metal test, the R9 M380 pulls far ahead. The database shows the R9 M380's average score is 16.2% higher than the FirePro's average, but that gap is entirely driven by the Metal workload, which the FirePro was never tested on. So the use-case answer depends on which API matters more. For OpenCL-centric tasks, the FirePro wins. For Metal-centric tasks, only the R9 M380 has measured data, and that data is strong.

The percentile rankings reinforce this split. The R9 M380 sits at the 58th percentile among all GPUs, while the FirePro M6100 sits at the 54th percentile. That four-percentile gap reflects the Metal score's contribution. Without it, the two parts would be nearly indistinguishable in OpenCL terms, since the FirePro actually beats the R9 in that specific test. The takeaway is that the R9 M380's apparent overall superiority is a function of the test suite, not of raw compute dominance in every workload.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the same fundamental building blocks. They use the GCN 2.0 architecture, are built on TSMC's 28 nm process, and pack the same 2,080 million transistors onto a 160 mm² die. The transistor density is identical at 13.0M per mm². Both support DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The memory subsystem is also matched: both use GDDR5 with a 128-bit bus and 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth, running at 1500 MHz with 6 Gbps effective speed.

The differences emerge in the chip design and execution resources. The R9 M380 uses the Strato chip, while the FirePro M6100 uses Emerald. Despite the identical transistor count and die size, the FirePro allocates those transistors differently. It has 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operations pipelines. The R9 M380 has fewer shading units at 768, fewer TMUs at 48, but the same 16 ROPs. This means the FirePro has 16.7% more shading units and 16.7% more TMUs than the R9 M380.

Clock behavior differs as well. The R9 M380 has explicit clock specifications: a 900 MHz base and a 1000 MHz boost. The FirePro M6100's database entry lists no base or boost clock, only the memory clock. That absence makes direct clock comparison impossible, but the performance per clock can be inferred. The FirePro's higher shading unit count, combined with its OpenCL win, suggests it maintains competitive clocks despite the missing specification.

Memory capacity is another differentiator. The R9 M380 ships with 4 GB of GDDR5, while the FirePro M6100 has 2 GB. Both use the same 128-bit bus and achieve the same 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, so the extra capacity on the R9 does not change bandwidth, only the amount of data that can be held on-die. The FirePro compensates with a higher pixel rate of 17.60 GPixel/s versus the R9's 16.00 GPixel/s, and a higher texture rate of 61.60 GTexel/s versus 48.00 GTexel/s. Its FP32 throughput reaches 1.971 TFLOPS, against the R9's 1.536 TFLOPS.

Form factor also separates them. The FirePro M6100 is an MXM Module with MXM-B (3.0) interface and no power connectors, designed for portable device dependent display outputs. The R9 M380's bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16, and its slot width and power connectors are not recorded. The R9 belongs to the Gem System (R9 M300) generation, while the FirePro belongs to the FirePro Mobile (Mx100) generation. Release dates place the FirePro on 2014-05-26 and the R9 on 2015-05-04, roughly a year apart. Both are end-of-life products, with the R9 succeeding the Solar System generation and preceding Polaris Mobile, while the FirePro succeeds FirePro Mobility and precedes Radeon Pro Mobile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains exactly one head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. The FirePro M6100 scored 13354, and the R9 M380 scored 12565. The delta is 5.9% in favor of the FirePro, and the database records the FirePro as the winner. That is a meaningful margin, though not a landslide. It suggests the FirePro's additional shading units and TMUs translate into real OpenCL compute advantage.

Looking at the rival context, the FirePro M6100's OpenCL score places it exactly level with the AMD Radeon RX 5500M, which scores 13356, a 0% delta. It also sits within 0.2% of the AMD Radeon HD 8950M (13376) and within 0.4% of the AMD Radeon Pro 555 (13407). The AMD Radeon Pro 555X scores 13321, 0.3% lower. The FirePro is thus in a tight cluster of mobile GPUs with nearly identical OpenCL performance, which reinforces that its 5.9% edge over the R9 M380 is the outlier in this group rather than the norm.

The R9 M380's OpenCL score of 12565 does not appear in its nearest rivals list directly, but its average benchmark score of 15521 tells a different story. That average is boosted by the Geekbench Metal result of 18476. The R9's nearest rivals, based on average score, include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti at 15548 (0.2% higher), the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 at 15679 (1% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 at 15290 (1.5% lower), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 at 15283 (1.6% lower). These are desktop-class cards, and the R9 M380's average score places it among them. That is remarkable for a mobile GPU, but it hinges entirely on the Metal workload.

If one isolates the OpenCL results, the FirePro is the clear winner. If one considers the average benchmark score, the R9 M380 is the winner by a wide margin. The database does not provide a Metal score for the FirePro, so the question of whether it could match the R9's Metal performance remains open. The data cannot answer that, only the implication that the FirePro's higher shading unit count might help in Metal as well, but that is speculation beyond the recorded facts.

The Verdict

The data points to a simple conclusion for different audiences. The AMD FirePro M6100 is the better choice for OpenCL compute workloads. Its 13354 score beats the R9 M380's 12565 by 5.9%, and its 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 1.971 TFLOPS FP32 throughput give it a structural advantage in raw compute. The R9 M380's 768 shading units and 1.536 TFLOPS cannot match that. Also, the FirePro's OpenCL score sits in a tight cluster with the RX 5500M, HD 8950M, and Radeon Pro 555, meaning it is competitive with much newer mobile parts.

The AMD Radeon R9 M380 is the better choice if the target application uses Metal. Its Geekbench Metal score of 18476 is the only Metal data point in this comparison, and it lifts the average benchmark score to 15521, placing it alongside the GTX 1080 Ti and RTX 2060 in overall average performance. The 4 GB memory capacity also gives it more headroom for large datasets compared to the FirePro's 2 GB, though both have identical bandwidth.

For a system builder choosing between these two, the decision is workload-driven. OpenCL-heavy tasks, which include many professional compute applications, favor the FirePro M6100. Metal-heavy tasks, which are common in Apple-oriented ecosystems, favor the R9 M380. The FirePro's MXM form factor and no-power-connector design make it a drop-in module for portable devices, while the R9's PCIe 3.0 x16 interface suggests a different integration path. Both are end-of-life, so availability and driver support are not differentiators. The percentile gap, 58th versus 54th, reflects the R9's Metal advantage, but the head-to-head OpenCL win belongs to the FirePro. There is no single "better" GPU here; there are two specialized tools.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the only head-to-head benchmark in the database?

A: The AMD FirePro M6100 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 13354 against the AMD Radeon R9 M380's 12565, a 5.9% margin.

Q: Does the Radeon R9 M380 have any benchmark advantage?

A: Yes, the R9 M380 has a Geekbench Metal score of 18476, which the FirePro M6100 lacks. This pushes the R9's average benchmark score to 15521, compared to the FirePro's 13354.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in shading unit count?

A: The FirePro M6100 has 896 shading units and 56 texture mapping units, while the R9 M380 has 768 shading units and 48 texture mapping units. Both have 16 raster operations pipelines.

Q: Are the memory systems identical?

A: Both use GDDR5 with a 128-bit bus and 96.00 GB/s bandwidth at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective), but the R9 M380 has 4 GB while the FirePro M6100 has 2 GB.

Q: What is the FP32 performance difference?

A: The FirePro M6100 delivers 1.971 TFLOPS FP32, while the R9 M380 delivers 1.536 TFLOPS. The FirePro also has higher pixel rate (17.60 GPixel/s vs 16.00 GPixel/s) and texture rate (61.60 GTexel/s vs 48.00 GTexel/s).

Q: How do their nearest rivals compare?

A: The R9 M380's average score of 15521 sits within 1.6% of the GTX 580 (15283), RTX 2060 (15290), GTX 1080 Ti (15548), and Radeon Pro W5500 (15679). The FirePro's OpenCL score of 13354 is within 0.4% of the RX 5500M, HD 8950M, Radeon Pro 555X, and Radeon Pro 555.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon R9 M380 | AMD FirePro M6100 |

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

| Chip | Strato | Emerald |

| Generation | Gem System (R9 M300) | FirePro Mobile (Mx100) |

| Base Clock | 900 MHz | Not recorded |

| Boost Clock | 1000 MHz | Not recorded |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 2 GB |

| Shading Units | 768 | 896 |

| TMUs | 48 | 56 |

| ROPs | 16 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 16.00 GPixel/s | 17.60 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 48.00 GTexel/s | 61.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1.536 TFLOPS | 1.971 TFLOPS |

| Slot Width | Not recorded | MXM Module |

| Power Connectors | Not recorded | None |

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

| Display Outputs | Not recorded | Portable Device Dependent |

| Release Date | 2015-05-04 | 2014-05-26 |

| Predecessor | Solar System | FirePro Mobility |

| Successor | Polaris Mobile | Radeon Pro Mobile |

| Geekbench OpenCL | 12565 | 13354 |

| Geekbench Metal | 18476 | Not recorded |

| Avg Benchmark Score | 15521 | 13354 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 58 | 54 |

The shared specifications include the GCN 2.0 architecture, TSMC's 28 nm process, 2,080 million transistors, 160 mm² die size, 13.0M/mm² transistor density, GDDR5 memory type, 128-bit bus width, 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, 1500 MHz memory clock, 6 Gbps effective memory speed, DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.2.170, and end-of-life production status. The FirePro M6100 has no recorded base or boost clocks, while the R9 M380 has no recorded slot width, power connectors, or display outputs.