AMD FirePro W2100 vs AMD Radeon R5 Graphics Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a clear split between the two AMD graphics solutions. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics takes a decisive lead with a score of 5183, while the AMD FirePro W2100 manages 4093. That is a 21% advantage for the Radeon R5 Graphics, a substantial margin that reflects its higher raw compute throughput in general-purpose workloads. The FirePro W2100 does not close that gap in any way; the recorded delta shows it trailing by that full 21 points.

The story flips completely in the Geekbench Vulkan test. Here, the AMD FirePro W2100 scores 4497, while the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics falls to 2582. That gives the FirePro a massive 74.2% lead, an enormous swing that dwarfs the OpenCL difference. The FirePro’s Vulkan performance is more than 1.7 times that of the Radeon R5 Graphics, which suggests its driver stack and hardware implementation handle the modern API far more efficiently. The Radeon R5 Graphics, despite winning OpenCL, appears severely limited in Vulkan, likely due to its integrated nature and memory sharing with the system.

Looking at the average benchmark score, the FirePro W2100 records 4295, while the Radeon R5 Graphics sits at 3883. This puts the FirePro ahead by roughly 10.6% on average, even though it loses the single OpenCL matchup. The reason is the Vulkan result’s weight: a 74.2% win pulls the FirePro’s average up, while the Radeon R5’s weak Vulkan score drags its average down. The database shows the FirePro at the 25th percentile across all GPUs, while the Radeon R5 Graphics sits at the 23rd percentile, a narrow gap that reflects their similar overall standing despite the divergent per-test results.

When comparing to nearest rivals, the FirePro W2100’s average score of 4295 puts it within 0.3% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M (4282), 0.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon Vega 3 (4268), and 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M (4241). It trails the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6 (4335) by 0.9%, a negligible margin that shows the FirePro holding its own against much newer hardware in this specific benchmark metric. The Radeon R5 Graphics, with its 3883 average, is 0.4% behind the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 (3898), 0.9% behind the NVIDIA Quadro K2000D (3919), and 1.2% behind the NVIDIA Quadro 2000D (3930). It edges out the NVIDIA GeForce MX110 (3834) by 1.3%. These deltas are tight, but they place the Radeon R5 Graphics in a slightly lower tier overall.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics is the clear winner in OpenCL compute workloads. Its 5183 score against the FirePro’s 4093 represents a 21% advantage, and this is the kind of performance that matters for general-purpose GPU compute, such as OpenCL-based rendering, physics simulations, or data processing. The Radeon R5 Graphics also has the higher peak FP32 throughput at 388.1 GFLOPS, though that is only part of the story. Its texture rate of 12.13 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 3.032 GPixel/s are both lower than the FirePro’s, so the OpenCL win is not about rasterization speed but about compute shader execution.

The AMD FirePro W2100 wins decisively in Vulkan. Its 4497 score versus 2582 is a 74.2% margin, and this is the modern API that matters for current games and Vulkan-based applications. The FirePro also holds advantages in raw graphics throughput: its pixel rate of 5.440 GPixel/s is 79.4% higher than the Radeon R5 Graphics’ 3.032 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 13.60 GTexel/s is 12.1% higher than the Radeon’s 12.13 GTexel/s. These numbers indicate that for actual rendering work, the FirePro should deliver faster fill and texturing, even though its compute-oriented OpenCL score is lower.

The average benchmark score favors the FirePro at 4295 versus 3883, which suggests that across mixed workloads, the FirePro is the more balanced performer. The Radeon R5 Graphics is a one-trick pony in OpenCL, while the FirePro offers competitive compute and superior graphics API performance. For users who prioritize Vulkan gaming or modern API adoption, the FirePro is the obvious choice. For users who need raw OpenCL compute and do not care about Vulkan, the Radeon R5 Graphics wins.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different generations of AMD’s Graphics Core Next architecture. The FirePro W2100 uses GCN 1.0, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with the Oland chip. The Radeon R5 Graphics uses GCN 2.0, also on a 28 nm process, but fabricated by GlobalFoundries with the Spectre SL chip. This architectural gap explains much of the performance divergence: GCN 2.0 brought improvements to compute efficiency and power management, which likely contributes to the Radeon R5’s OpenCL advantage. However, the FirePro’s GCN 1.0 implementation appears to handle Vulkan better, possibly due to driver maturity for discrete cards.

The transistor counts differ dramatically: the FirePro has 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.3 million per mm². The Radeon R5 Graphics has 2,410 million transistors on a 245 mm² die, with a lower density of 9.8 million per mm². The Radeon’s larger die is likely due to its integration as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) on a Kaveri APU, sharing the die with CPU cores. The FirePro is a discrete card with its own memory, while the Radeon R5 Graphics relies on System Shared memory, with bandwidth listed as System Dependent. This is a critical difference: the FirePro has dedicated 2 GB DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth, while the Radeon R5 has no dedicated VRAM and must compete with the CPU for system memory bandwidth.

The FirePro has 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 raster operation units. The Radeon R5 Graphics has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. The FirePro’s higher unit counts directly explain its pixel and texture rate advantages. The FirePro’s FP32 throughput is 435.2 GFLOPS, while the Radeon R5 is 388.1 GFLOPS, a 12.1% difference in favor of the FirePro. Despite this, the Radeon R5 wins OpenCL, which suggests that GCN 2.0’s compute scheduling is more efficient, or that the FirePro’s drivers are optimized differently.

Power consumption is another clear separator. The FirePro has a TDP of 26 W and requires a suggested PSU of 200 W, with no power connectors and a single-slot design. The Radeon R5 Graphics has a TDP of 15 W and is an IGP with no slot width, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU. The Radeon’s lower power draw is expected for an integrated solution, but the FirePro’s discrete design allows for dedicated cooling and stable sustained clocks. The FirePro’s base clock is 630 MHz with a boost of 680 MHz, while the Radeon R5 has no listed base or boost clocks, as its clocks are likely dependent on the APU’s thermal and power budgets.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear choice for different use cases. The AMD FirePro W2100 is the better overall GPU for modern graphics workloads. Its 74.2% Vulkan advantage is too large to ignore, and its higher pixel rate (5.440 vs 3.032 GPixel/s) and texture rate (13.60 vs 12.13 GTexel/s) make it the stronger rasterizer. The FirePro also has dedicated 2 GB DDR3 memory with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth, which provides predictable performance, while the Radeon R5 Graphics depends on system memory with variable bandwidth. For any user running Vulkan applications, games, or graphics rendering, the FirePro is the pick.

The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics is the choice for OpenCL compute. Its 21% OpenCL lead and 5183 score indicate strong general-purpose compute capability, likely due to the GCN 2.0 architecture’s improvements. It also consumes less power at 15 W versus 26 W, making it suitable for low-power systems. However, its Vulkan performance is poor, and its shared memory architecture can bottleneck performance in memory-intensive tasks.

The average benchmark score favors the FirePro at 4295 versus 3883, and the FirePro sits at a higher percentile (25th vs 23rd). For a balanced workload, the FirePro wins. The Radeon R5 Graphics is only preferable if the workload is exclusively OpenCL and power efficiency is paramount. The FirePro’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6, a much newer card, yet the FirePro trails it by only 0.9% in the database’s average score, indicating that the FirePro’s driver support and hardware still hold up.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro W2100 has an average benchmark score of 4295, while the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics scores 3883. The FirePro leads by about 10.6% on average.

Q: How big is the Vulkan performance gap between the two?

A: The FirePro W2100 scores 4497 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the Radeon R5 Graphics scores 2582. The FirePro leads by 74.2%, a very large margin.

Q: Does the Radeon R5 Graphics win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the Radeon R5 Graphics wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 5183 versus the FirePro’s 4093, a 21% advantage.

Q: What are the memory configurations?

A: The FirePro W2100 has 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon R5 Graphics uses System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The FirePro W2100 has 320 shading units, while the Radeon R5 Graphics has 256. The FirePro also has 20 TMUs and 8 ROPs, versus 16 TMUs and 4 ROPs for the Radeon.

Q: How do their power draws compare?

A: The FirePro W2100 has a TDP of 26 W and requires a suggested PSU of 200 W. The Radeon R5 Graphics has a TDP of 15 W and is an IGP with no suggested PSU.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FirePro W2100 | AMD Radeon R5 Graphics |

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

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | GCN 2.0 |

| Chip | Oland | Spectre SL |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 950 million | 2,410 million |

| Die Size | 77 mm² | 245 mm² |

| Shading Units | 320 | 256 |

| TMUs | 20 | 16 |

| ROPs | 8 | 4 |

| Pixel Rate | 5.440 GPixel/s | 3.032 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 13.60 GTexel/s | 12.13 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 435.2 GFLOPS | 388.1 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 26 W | 15 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | None | None |

| Suggested PSU | 200 W | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | IGP |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | DDR3 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 28.80 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Display Outputs | 2x DisplayPort 1.2 | Motherboard Dependent |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_0) |

| Release Date | 2014-08-11 | 2014-09-16 |