AMD FirePro M6100 vs AMD Radeon RX 550 Comparison

AMD FirePro M6100 vs AMD Radeon RX 550: GCN 2.0 vs GCN 4.0

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the results are decisive. The AMD FirePro M6100 scores 13,354 points, while the AMD Radeon RX 550 scores 11,063 points. That is a 20.7% advantage for the FirePro M6100, making it the clear winner in compute workloads measured through OpenCL. This is not a marginal difference; it is a substantial gap that places the two cards in different performance tiers despite both being AMD products from the same era.

The FirePro M6100 sits in the 54th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the RX 550 sits in the 50th percentile. This percentile gap confirms that the FirePro M6100 is not just faster than the RX 550 in this specific test, but also ranks higher relative to the entire field of recorded graphics processors. The FirePro M6100's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 5500M at 13,356 points (essentially identical, 0% delta), the AMD Radeon HD 8950M at 13,376 points (0.2% slower than the FirePro), and the AMD Radeon Pro 555X at 13,321 points (0.3% slower). These rivals are all within a fraction of a percent of the FirePro M6100, indicating that it performs in a tight cluster of similar mobile and workstation GPUs.

The RX 550, by contrast, has a different set of nearest neighbors. Its average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 11,075, which is lower than its OpenCL score alone because it also includes results from other benchmark suites. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q at 11,088 points (0.1% faster), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER at 11,047 points (0.3% slower), and the AMD FirePro W4300 at 11,225 points (1.3% slower). The presence of high-end NVIDIA workstation cards near the RX 550 in the ranking is a reflection of the RX 550's low absolute score, not its competitiveness with those products.

The RX 550 has additional benchmark data beyond OpenCL. It scores 20,838 in Geekbench Metal, 12,270 in Geekbench Vulkan, and 127 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. The FirePro M6100 has no recorded results for these other tests, so no direct comparison is possible. The 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 127 is notably low, which aligns with the RX 550's position as an entry-level discrete GPU. The Metal and Vulkan scores are higher than the OpenCL result, suggesting the architecture handles those APIs reasonably well, but without corresponding FirePro M6100 data, the comparison must rest on the OpenCL result alone.

Across the single head-to-head test, the FirePro M6100 wins 1 and the RX 550 wins 0. The data is unambiguous: in the one test where both cards were measured under identical conditions, the older mobile workstation GPU outperforms the newer desktop budget GPU by a wide margin.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different generations of AMD's Graphics Core Next architecture. The FirePro M6100 uses GCN 2.0, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The RX 550 uses GCN 4.0, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The process shrink from 28 nm to 14 nm is significant, but it does not translate into a performance advantage for the newer card in compute workloads.

The FirePro M6100 is based on the Emerald chip, which contains 2,080 million transistors on a 160 mm² die. The RX 550 is based on the Lexa chip, which contains 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die. The RX 550 packs more transistors into a much smaller area, giving it a transistor density of 21.4 million transistors per square millimeter, compared to the FirePro M6100's 13.0 million per square millimeter. This density improvement is a direct result of the newer manufacturing process.

The compute configuration tells a different story. The FirePro M6100 has 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output pipelines. The RX 550 has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output pipelines. The FirePro M6100 has 384 more shading units and 24 more TMUs, which explains its higher raw compute throughput. The ROP count is identical at 16 for both cards.

The FirePro M6100 achieves 1.971 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, with a texture rate of 61.60 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 17.60 GPixel/s. The RX 550 achieves 1,211.4 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, with a texture rate of 37.86 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 18.93 GPixel/s. The FirePro M6100 leads in FP32 by a wide margin and in texture fill rate, but the RX 550 leads slightly in pixel fill rate due to its higher clock speeds.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The FirePro M6100 has no recorded base or boost clock, but its memory runs at 1500 MHz, giving 6 Gbps effective. The RX 550 has a base clock of 1100 MHz and a boost clock of 1183 MHz, with memory at 1750 MHz, giving 7 Gbps effective. The RX 550's higher memory clock yields 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the FirePro M6100 delivers 96.00 GB/s. Both use 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus.

The FirePro M6100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The RX 550 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The Vulkan version difference is notable: the RX 550 supports a newer revision of the API. The RX 550 also has FP16 capability at 1,211.4 GFLOPS (1:1 ratio with FP32), while the FirePro M6100 has no recorded FP16 data.

The physical formats are entirely different. The FirePro M6100 is an MXM module using MXM-B (3.0) interface, designed for laptops and portable workstations. The RX 550 is a dual-slot desktop card with a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, measuring 145 mm in length (5.7 inches). The RX 550 has a 50 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the FirePro M6100 has no recorded TDP. The RX 550's display outputs are 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the FirePro M6100's outputs are portable device dependent.

Where Each One Wins

The FirePro M6100 wins in raw compute performance. Its OpenCL score is 20.7% higher than the RX 550, and it has more shading units, more TMUs, higher FP32 throughput, and higher texture fill rate. Any workload that relies on parallel floating-point compute, such as OpenCL-based processing, will favor the FirePro M6100. Its 896 shading units give it a 75% advantage in shader count over the RX 550's 512, which is the fundamental reason for its compute superiority.

The RX 550 wins in several specific areas. It has a higher pixel fill rate (18.93 GPixel/s versus 17.60 GPixel/s), which suggests it can handle rasterization-heavy tasks slightly better. It has higher memory bandwidth (112.0 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s), which benefits texture-heavy workloads and higher resolutions. It supports Vulkan 1.3, a newer API version than the FirePro M6100's Vulkan 1.2.170, which may enable better performance in Vulkan-based titles. It also has FP16 support, which is absent from the FirePro M6100's recorded specifications.

The RX 550's other benchmark results show strengths in specific APIs. Its Geekbench Metal score of 20,838 is its best recorded result, indicating strong performance in Apple's Metal API. Its Vulkan score of 12,270 is higher than its OpenCL score of 11,063, suggesting the architecture is better optimized for Vulkan than for OpenCL. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 127 is low in absolute terms, but it represents a different workload type.

The FirePro M6100's position as a mobile workstation GPU means it is designed for sustained compute in professional applications. The RX 550, as a desktop consumer GPU, is designed for general-purpose graphics and light gaming. The data supports this split: the FirePro M6100 is the compute specialist, while the RX 550 has strengths in bandwidth, newer APIs, and pixel throughput.

The Verdict

The AMD FirePro M6100 is the faster GPU in compute workloads, as demonstrated by its 20.7% lead in Geekbench OpenCL and its higher percentile ranking (54th versus 50th). Users who prioritize raw OpenCL performance, shader throughput, or texture fill rate should choose the FirePro M6100. Its 896 shading units and 56 TMUs provide a significant computational advantage that the RX 550 cannot overcome despite its newer architecture.

The AMD Radeon RX 550 is the better choice for users who need a desktop card with modern API support. It offers Vulkan 1.3, newer memory clocks at 7 Gbps effective, higher bandwidth at 112.0 GB/s, and FP16 compute. Its 50 W TDP and 250 W suggested PSU make it a low-power option, and its PCIe 3.0 x8 interface is standard for desktop systems. The RX 550's Metal performance of 20,838 points is strong, and its Vulkan score of 12,270 exceeds its OpenCL score.

The FirePro M6100 is an MXM module, which limits its use to compatible laptops and workstations. The RX 550 is a dual-slot desktop card with a 145 mm length. This physical difference is decisive for most users: if the system requires an MXM module, the FirePro M6100 is the only option; if the system has a PCIe slot, the RX 550 is the only option. The choice is therefore as much about form factor as performance.

For compute-heavy professional workloads on mobile workstations, the FirePro M6100 is the data-backed winner. For desktop users seeking a low-power card with modern features, the RX 550 is the appropriate pick. The benchmark data does not support choosing the RX 550 for OpenCL compute, as it trails by more than 20%. The data does not support choosing the FirePro M6100 for Vulkan or Metal workloads, as no comparative results exist.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute?

A: The AMD FirePro M6100 scores 13,354 points versus the RX 550's 11,063 points, a 20.7% advantage for the FirePro M6100.

Q: Does the newer architecture help the RX 550 win any area?

A: Yes. The RX 550 has a higher pixel rate (18.93 GPixel/s versus 17.60 GPixel/s) and higher memory bandwidth (112.0 GB/s versus 1,096.00 GB/s, but the latter is stated as 96.00 GB/s in the database records). It also supports Vulkan 1.3.

Q: What are the shading unit counts for each card?

A: The FirePro M6100 has 896 shading units, while the RX 550 has 512 shading units.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth and by how much?

A: The RX 550 has 112.0 GB/s bandwidth, which is 16% higher than the FirePro M6100's 96.00 GB/s.

Q: What is the FP32 performance difference between the two?

A: The FirePro M6100 achieves 1.971 TFLOPS, while the RX 550 achieves 1,211.4 GFLOPS.

Q: Which card has a lower TDP rating?

A: The RX 550 has a 50 W TDP, while the FirePro M6100 has no recorded TDP in the database.

Q: Can the FirePro M6100 match the RX 550's Vulkan performance, and what are the specific numbers for RX 550?

A: The RX 550 scores 12,270 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the FirePro M6100 has no recorded Vulkan score.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FirePro M6100 | AMD Radeon RX 550 |

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

| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | GCN 4.0 |

| Chip | Emerald | Lexa |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 2,080 million | 2,200 million |

| Die Size | 160 mm² | 103 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.0M / mm² | 21.4M / mm² |

| Base Clock | Not recorded | 1100 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not recorded | 1183 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1500 MHz, 6 Gbps effective | 1750 MHz, 7 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | 128 bit | 128 bit |

| Bandwidth | 96.00 GB/s | 112.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 896 | 512 |

| TMUs | 56 | 32 |

| ROPs | 16 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 17.60 GPixel/s | 18.93 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 61.60 GTexel/s | 37.86 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1.971 TFLOPS | 1,211.4 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not recorded | 1,211.4 GFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | Not recorded | 50 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | None |

| Suggested PSU | Not recorded | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (12_0) |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.3 |

| Length | Not recorded | 145 mm, 5.7 inches |

| Release Date | 2014-05-26 | 2017-04-19 |

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

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | 79 USD |