AMD FirePro W2100 vs AMD Radeon R6 M255DX Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly along API lines. The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX wins the only direct head-to-head comparison recorded in the database, the Geekbench Vulkan test, with a score of 4867 against the FirePro W2100's 4497. That is an 8.2% advantage. The R6 M255DX's win is its sole recorded benchmark, but it is a meaningful one because Vulkan is a cross-platform, low-level graphics API that stresses raw shader throughput and driver efficiency.

The AMD FirePro W2100, by contrast, has no wins in the head-to-head table. Its one additional benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, shows a score of 4093, which is notably lower than its own Vulkan result of 4497. This suggests the FirePro is better suited to compute workloads that leverage its dedicated memory subsystem, though the data does not include a comparable OpenCL score for the R6 M255DX to draw a direct comparison. The R6 M255DX, as an integrated graphics processor, depends on system memory, and its Vulkan score reflects that configuration.

Looking at the broader competitive landscape, the R6 M255DX sits at the 28th percentile of all GPUs, while the FirePro W2100 sits at the 25th percentile. That three-percentile gap aligns with the 8.2% Vulkan delta. The nearest rivals for the R6 M255DX are all within a narrow band: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M scores 4855, just 0.2% behind; the GeForce 940MX scores 4844, 0.5% behind; the GeForce GTS 450 scores 4893, 0.5% ahead; and the GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB scores 4901, 0.7% ahead. The FirePro W2100's rivals are similarly tight: the GeForce GTX 460M scores 4282, 0.3% behind; the AMD Radeon Vega 3 scores 4268, 0.6% behind; the Quadro K3000M scores 4241, 1.3% behind; and the GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6 scores 4335, 0.9% ahead. Neither card dominates its peer group by more than a couple of percentage points.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on the same fundamental architecture, GCN 1.0, and both are manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process. The transistor density is identical at 12.3 million transistors per square millimeter. The similarities end there. The R6 M255DX uses the Jet chip, which packs 690 million transistors onto a 56 mm² die. The FirePro W2100 uses the Oland chip, which is physically larger at 77 mm² and contains 950 million transistors. That is a 260 million transistor difference, and the larger die gives the FirePro more room for its dedicated memory controllers and display outputs.

The generation labels differ too. The R6 M255DX belongs to the Gem System Hybrid (Rx M200) generation, while the FirePro W2100 belongs to the FirePro GCN (Wx100) generation. The R6 M255DX has a base clock of 780 MHz and a boost clock of 855 MHz. The FirePro W2100 runs slower, with a base clock of 630 MHz and a boost clock of 680 MHz. Despite the clock disadvantage, the FirePro has its own memory: 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth. The R6 M255DX has no dedicated memory at all; it uses system shared memory, and its bandwidth is listed as system dependent. That is the single biggest architectural divergence. The FirePro's memory clock is 900 MHz, or 1800 Mbps effective, while the R6 M255DX's memory clock is simply "System Shared."

The bus interface also separates them. The R6 M255DX is an integrated graphics processor, meaning it has no bus interface beyond the IGP connection and no slot width. The FirePro W2100 is a discrete card with a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface and a single-slot form factor. Its dimensions are 168 mm in length and 69 mm in height. The FirePro draws a rated 26 W and requires a 200 W suggested PSU, though it needs no power connectors. The R6 M255DX has no TDP listed in the database. Display outputs also differ: the R6 M255DX's outputs are portable device dependent, while the FirePro W2100 provides 2x DisplayPort 1.2.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison in the database is the Geekbench Vulkan test. The R6 M255DX scores 4867, and the FirePro W2100 scores 4497. That is a delta of 8.2% in favor of the R6 M255DX. This result is worth examining because both cards share the same architecture, the same number of shading units (320), the same number of texture mapping units (20), and the same number of render output units (8). The difference must come from clock speeds and memory configuration. The R6 M255DX's boost clock of 855 MHz is 175 MHz higher than the FirePro's 680 MHz boost. That alone explains a significant portion of the Vulkan gap.

However, the FirePro's dedicated 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth does not appear to compensate for its lower clocks in this particular test. Vulkan workloads often favor raw compute throughput, and the R6 M255DX's higher clocks give it a theoretical FP32 rate of 547.2 GFLOPS, while the FirePro manages 435.2 GFLOPS. That is a 112 GFLOPS difference in the R6's favor. The pixel rates tell a similar story: the R6 M255DX achieves 6.840 GPixel/s, and the FirePro achieves 5.440 GPixel/s. The texture rates are 17.10 GTexel/s versus 13.60 GTexel/s. Every throughput metric favors the R6 M255DX, which aligns with its Vulkan win.

The FirePro's only other benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, yields a score of 4093. That is 9.8% lower than its own Vulkan score of 4497. OpenCL is a compute-oriented API that can be sensitive to memory bandwidth, and the FirePro's dedicated DDR3 might be expected to help there, but the score still lands below the R6's Vulkan result. Without a matching OpenCL score for the R6 M255DX, the database cannot confirm whether the FirePro's OpenCL performance would outrank the R6 in that specific test. The recorded data only shows that the R6 M255DX wins the Vulkan comparison.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Radeon R6 M255DX | AMD FirePro W2100 |

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

| Chip | Jet | Oland |

| Generation | Gem System Hybrid (Rx M200) | FirePro GCN (Wx100) |

| Transistors | 690 million | 950 million |

| Die Size | 56 mm² | 77 mm² |

| Base Clock | 780 MHz | 630 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 855 MHz | 680 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 128 bit |

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

| Memory Clock | System Shared | 900 MHz, 1800 Mbps effective |

| Pixel Rate | 6.840 GPixel/s | 5.440 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 17.10 GTexel/s | 13.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 547.2 GFLOPS | 435.2 GFLOPS |

| TDP | Not listed | 26 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Single-slot |

| Bus Interface | IGP | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 2x DisplayPort 1.2 |

| Dimensions | Not listed | 168 mm length, 69 mm height |

| Power Connectors | Not listed | None |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 200 W |

| Release Date | 2014-01-06 | 2014-08-11 |

| Predecessor | Not listed | FirePro Terascale |

| Successor | Not listed | Radeon Pro Polaris |

The two cards share identical shading units (320), TMUs (20), ROPs (8), process node (28 nm), foundry (TSMC), transistor density (12.3M / mm²), architecture (GCN 1.0), DirectX support (12, 11_1), OpenGL support (4.6), and Vulkan support (1.2.170). Both are marked end-of-life in the database. Neither has a listed launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in the Geekbench Vulkan test?

A: The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX scores 4867, which is 8.2% higher than the AMD FirePro W2100's 4497.

Q: Do both cards use the same graphics architecture?

A: Yes, both use GCN 1.0 and are built on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but they use different chips: the R6 M255DX uses Jet, and the FirePro W2100 uses Oland.

Q: How does the memory configuration differ?

A: The R6 M255DX uses system shared memory with bandwidth that is system dependent. The FirePro W2100 has 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 on a 128-bit bus with 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What is the clock speed difference?

A: The R6 M255DX has a base clock of 780 MHz and a boost of 855 MHz. The FirePro W2100 has a base clock of 630 MHz and a boost of 680 MHz.

Q: Which card has higher theoretical throughput?

A: The R6 M255DX leads in all recorded throughput metrics: 547.2 GFLOPS FP32 versus 435.2 GFLOPS, 6.840 GPixel/s versus 5.440 GPixel/s, and 17.10 GTexel/s versus 13.60 GTexel/s.

Q: Are the nearest rivals for each card closely matched?

A: Yes. The R6 M255DX's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M at 0.2% behind, and the FirePro W2100's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M at 0.3% behind. Both cards sit within 1.3% of their respective rival groups.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but narrow winner. The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX outperforms the AMD FirePro W2100 in the only recorded head-to-head benchmark, the Geekbench Vulkan test, by 8.2%. Its higher clocks (780 MHz base, 855 MHz boost versus 630 MHz base, 680 MHz boost) drive superior pixel, texture, and FP32 rates. The R6 M255DX also holds a higher percentile ranking, 28th versus 25th, and a higher average benchmark score, 4867 versus 4295.

The FirePro W2100 does have advantages that are not reflected in the Vulkan score. Its dedicated 2 GB DDR3 memory with 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth is a structural asset, and its 26 W TDP with no power connectors makes it easy to install in a single-slot PCIe 3.0 x8 slot. The R6 M255DX, as an integrated part, has no such flexibility; it is tied to the portable device it ships in.

For a user choosing between these two based solely on recorded benchmark results, the R6 M255DX is the faster GPU in Vulkan workloads. But the FirePro W2100's dedicated memory and discrete form factor make it a more practical choice for systems that need a standalone graphics card with DisplayPort outputs. The R6 M255DX is the performance pick; the FirePro W2100 is the integration pick. The 8.2% Vulkan delta is real, but it does not erase the FirePro's structural advantages for desktop workstation builds.