AMD FirePro M6100 vs AMD Radeon Vega 11 Comparison

# AMD Radeon Vega 11 vs AMD FirePro M6100

The AMD Radeon Vega 11 and AMD FirePro M6100 represent two distinct approaches to mobile graphics, separated by five years of architectural evolution. The Vega 11 is a 2019 integrated graphics processor built on the 12 nm Picasso chip, while the FirePro M6100 is a 2014 discrete workstation GPU based on the 28 nm Emerald chip. Benchmark data shows the two are remarkably close in raw compute performance, with the Vega 11 edging ahead in the only head-to-head test available, but their underlying designs tell very different stories about how each achieves its results.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it is extraordinarily tight. The AMD Radeon Vega 11 scores 13,392, while the AMD FirePro M6100 scores 13,354. That is a delta of just 0.3% in favor of the Vega 11 — a margin so small it falls within typical run-to-run variance for most benchmark suites. This near-parity is striking because the two GPUs achieve identical FP32 performance of 1.971 TFLOPS and identical texture fill rates of 61.60 GTexel/s. When two products post the same compute throughput, benchmark scores that mirror that equality should come as no surprise.

Yet the context around these scores reveals meaningful differences. The Vega 11 sits at the 56th percentile of all GPUs, while the FirePro M6100 sits at the 54th percentile — a two-point gap that reflects the Vega 11's slight edge. The Vega 11's average benchmark score of 14,352 across multiple tests (including Geekbench Metal at 17,392 and Geekbench Vulkan at 12,273) suggests its OpenCL result is not its strongest showing. The FirePro M6100 has only one recorded benchmark — that same OpenCL test — so its average score of 13,354 is identical to its single result.

Looking at nearest rivals, the Vega 11's average score places it in a tight cluster. It trails the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M by 0.4% (14,404 vs 14,352) and the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 by 0.2% (14,385 vs 14,352), while leading the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics by 0.3% (14,315 vs 14,352) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN by 0.1% (14,373 vs 14,352). The FirePro M6100's average score of 13,354 puts it just 0.2% behind the AMD Radeon HD 8950M (13,376) and 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon Pro 555 (13,407), while leading the AMD Radeon Pro 555X by 0.3% (13,321 vs 13,354). The FirePro M6100 is essentially tied with the AMD Radeon RX 5500M, which scores 13,356 — a 0.0% delta.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute?

A: The AMD Radeon Vega 11 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 13,392 versus 13,354 for the AMD FirePro M6100, a margin of 0.3%. Both GPUs deliver identical FP32 performance of 1.971 TFLOPS.

Q: Do these GPUs have the same texture and pixel processing capabilities?

A: They have identical texture rates of 61.60 GTexel/s, but the FirePro M6100 has a higher pixel rate of 17.60 GPixel/s compared to 11.20 GPixel/s for the Vega 11. This difference comes from the FirePro M6100's 16 ROPs versus 8 ROPs on the Vega 11.

Q: How do their memory configurations affect performance?

A: The FirePro M6100 has a dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory with a 128-bit bus and 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Vega 11 uses system shared memory with bandwidth described as "System Dependent" — meaning its effective throughput relies entirely on the host system's RAM configuration.

Q: Which GPU supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The Vega 11 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3, while the FirePro M6100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Q: What is the architectural generation gap?

A: The Vega 11 uses GCN 5.0 architecture on a 12 nm process, while the FirePro M6100 uses GCN 2.0 on a 28 nm process. The Vega 11's Picasso chip packs 4,940 million transistors into 210 mm², versus 2,080 million transistors in 160 mm² for the FirePro M6100's Emerald chip.

Q: How does the Vega 11's performance compare to its own nearest rivals?

A: Its average score of 14,352 places it within 0.4% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M (14,404) and within 0.3% of the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics (14,315), effectively bracketing it between those two competitors.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is substantial. The Vega 11 is built on GCN 5.0, the fifth iteration of AMD's Graphics Core Next architecture, fabricated by GlobalFoundries on a 12 nm process. The FirePro M6100 uses GCN 2.0, a much earlier revision, manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process. This process shrink from 28 nm to 12 nm is a primary reason the Vega 11 packs more than double the transistors — 4,940 million versus 2,080 million — into a die that is only 210 mm² versus 160 mm². The transistor density tells the story: 23.5M per mm² for the Vega 11 versus 13.0M per mm² for the FirePro M6100.

Despite the transistor disparity, both GPUs deliver exactly 1.971 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. This is possible because the FirePro M6100 has more compute units doing less work per clock: 896 shading units and 56 texture mapping units versus 704 shading units and 44 TMUs on the Vega 11. The Vega 11 compensates with a much higher boost clock of 1400 MHz (base 300 MHz), while the FirePro M6100's clock speeds are not listed in the data. The Vega 11 also supports FP16 compute at 3.942 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, a capability the FirePro M6100 lacks entirely — its FP16 field is null.

The ROP count also differs: the FirePro M6100 has 16 ROPs, producing a pixel rate of 17.60 GPixel/s, while the Vega 11 has only 8 ROPs, yielding 11.20 GPixel/s. This makes the FirePro M6100 better suited for fill-rate-bound workloads despite the compute parity. The Vega 11's integrated design requires no power connectors and has a 15 W TDP, while the FirePro M6100's TDP is not specified but it ships as an MXM module with a bus interface of MXM-B (3.0).

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category. The Vega 11 is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with a slot width of "IGP" and a bus interface of "IGP," meaning it is embedded in the host processor. The FirePro M6100 is a discrete MXM module with a slot width of "MXM Module" and a bus interface of "MXM-B (3.0)."

Memory configurations are fundamentally different. The Vega 11 uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while the FirePro M6100 has 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro M6100's memory clock is listed at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective), while the Vega 11's memory clock is "System Shared."

The Vega 11 has a significantly lower pixel rate (11.20 GPixel/s vs 17.60 GPixel/s) but identical texture rate (61.60 GTexel/s). Its FP32 performance matches the FirePro M6100 at 1.971 TFLOPS, but it alone offers FP16 at 3.942 TFLOPS. The Vega 11 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3, while the FirePro M6100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

The Vega 11 is fabricated on 12 nm by GlobalFoundries with 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die; the FirePro M6100 uses 28 nm TSMC fabrication with 2,080 million transistors on a 160 mm² die. The Vega 11 has a 15 W TDP and requires no power connectors; the FirePro M6100's TDP is not listed but also requires no power connectors. Display outputs are motherboard dependent for the Vega 11 and portable device dependent for the FirePro M6100.

Release dates are separated by over five years: the Vega 11 launched in September 2019, while the FirePro M6100 launched in May 2014. Both are end-of-life products. The Vega 11's predecessor is GCN 3.0 IGP and its successor is Vega II IGP; the FirePro M6100's predecessor is FirePro Mobility and its successor is Radeon Pro Mobile.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a fascinating case of generational convergence. The AMD Radeon Vega 11 wins the only direct head-to-head test with a 0.3% margin — a statistically negligible difference. Both GPUs deliver identical FP32 throughput and identical texture fill rates, making them functionally equivalent for compute-heavy tasks that do not stress pixel output or memory bandwidth.

However, the FirePro M6100 holds clear advantages in pixel processing (17.60 GPixel/s vs 11.20 GPixel/s) and dedicated memory bandwidth (96.00 GB/s vs system-dependent). The Vega 11 counters with newer API support (Vulkan 1.3 vs 1.2.170, DirectX 12_1 vs 12_0), FP16 capability, and a dramatically more efficient manufacturing process (12 nm vs 28 nm) that allows double the transistor count in a similar die area.

From a pure performance-per-watt perspective, the Vega 11's 15 W TDP is notably low for the compute it delivers, though the FirePro M6100's TDP is unlisted, preventing a direct comparison. The Vega 11's percentile ranking of 56 versus the FirePro M6100's 54 suggests a slight overall edge, reinforced by its multi-test benchmark suite showing higher peak scores in Metal (17,392) and respectable Vulkan results (12,273).

Users needing a drop-in discrete GPU for a portable workstation may favor the FirePro M6100 for its dedicated VRAM and MXM form factor. Users building or buying a system around a Picasso APU would find the Vega 11 adequate for many tasks, with the caveat that its memory performance depends entirely on system RAM.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Vega 11 wins in compute-oriented scenarios where its FP16 support comes into play — the 3.942 TFLOPS FP16 rate is a capability the FirePro M6100 simply does not offer. It also wins on API modernity, supporting Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12_1, which could matter for newer applications built on these interfaces. The Vega 11's 56th percentile ranking and higher average benchmark score (14,352 vs 13,354) give it the overall performance crown, however slim.

The AMD FirePro M6100 wins in pixel-throughput-bound workloads. Its 17.60 GPixel/s rate versus 11.20 GPixel/s for the Vega 11 represents a 57% advantage in pixel fill, which can benefit certain rendering paths, display compositing, or legacy applications that rely heavily on rasterization. Its dedicated 2 GB of GDDR5 with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth also provides predictable memory performance, whereas the Vega 11's system-shared memory is only as fast as the host platform's RAM allows. For users who need consistent frame pacing in memory-sensitive tasks, the FirePro M6100's fixed bandwidth is an advantage.

The verdict from the data is that these two GPUs are far closer than their generational gap suggests. The Vega 11's process advantage and architectural updates deliver equal compute with better API support, while the FirePro M6100's discrete design and higher ROP count give it niche strengths. Neither is a decisive winner across the board — the 0.3% OpenCL margin confirms that — but each has clear scenarios where its specific feature set shines.