AMD FirePro W2100 vs AMD Radeon R7 M265 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single recorded head-to-head benchmark between these two mobile-class graphics parts is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the result is decisive. The AMD Radeon R7 M265 scores 4929, while the AMD FirePro W2100 scores 4093. That gives the R7 M265 a 20.4% lead in raw compute performance as measured by OpenCL. This is not a marginal victory; it is a substantial gap that will show up in any workload that leans on general-purpose GPU compute.

Looking at the broader database context, the R7 M265 sits at the 29th percentile among all GPUs, while the FirePro W2100 sits at the 25th percentile. The R7 M265's average benchmark score is 4929, which is essentially tied with the AMD Radeon R7 M360 (4931, a 0% delta) and slightly ahead of the AMD FirePro W5130M (4904, 0.5% faster). It even edges out the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB (4901, 0.6% delta), an oddity in the database that suggests the OpenCL test here is not a proxy for modern gaming performance. The FirePro W2100's average score is 4295, and its nearest rivals cluster around it: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M (4282, 0.3% delta), the AMD Radeon Vega 3 (4268, 0.6% delta), and the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M (4241, 1.3% delta). The FirePro W2100 sits just below the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6 in this metric (4335, a -0.9% delta), which again illustrates how these older OpenCL scores do not track modern GPU tiers.

The head-to-head data shows only one test, and the R7 M265 wins it outright. There is no recorded Vulkan head-to-head between the two, even though the FirePro W2100 has a separate Geekbench Vulkan score of 4497. That Vulkan number is higher than its OpenCL result, suggesting the FirePro architecture may handle Vulkan compute more efficiently relative to its OpenCL output, but without a matching R7 M265 Vulkan score, a direct comparison is impossible from the database.

The Verdict

The data is clear: the AMD Radeon R7 M265 is the faster card in compute workloads. Its 20.4% OpenCL advantage over the FirePro W2100 is the only direct comparison available, and it aligns with the underlying specifications. The R7 M265 has more shading units (384 vs. 320), more texture mapping units (24 vs. 20), and higher clock speeds (725 MHz base, 825 MHz boost vs. 630 MHz base, 680 MHz boost). These are not small differences; they compound into a meaningful performance gap.

The FirePro W2100 is not without its own merits, but those merits are not compute performance. It is a professional workstation card, and the database shows it carries the FirePro branding, which historically implies certified drivers and stability for professional applications. However, the benchmark data does not include any professional application-specific tests, so the only measurable advantage is in the physical design. The FirePro W2100 is a single-slot card, 168 mm (6.6 inches) long and 69 mm (2.7 inches) tall, with no power connectors and a 26 W TDP. It also has dual DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, which are absent from the R7 M265's recorded specifications.

Who should pick which? From the data alone, anyone needing raw OpenCL compute should pick the R7 M265. Anyone needing a low-profile, low-power workstation card with professional display outputs and a modest 200 W suggested PSU should consider the FirePro W2100. But for pure performance, the verdict is unambiguous: the R7 M265 wins the only benchmark that matters in this comparison.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on the same GCN 1.0 architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process. Both have exactly 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, giving both a transistor density of 12.3M per mm². The chip names differ: the R7 M265 uses the "Opal" chip, while the FirePro W2100 uses the "Oland" chip. These are likely related designs, but the database treats them as distinct.

The core configurations differ significantly. The R7 M265 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The FirePro W2100 has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The ROP count is identical, but the R7 M265 has 20% more shading units and 20% more TMUs, which directly explains its 20.4% OpenCL lead. The clock speeds also favor the R7 M265: 725 MHz base and 825 MHz boost, compared to 630 MHz base and 680 MHz boost for the FirePro W2100. The memory clocks are identical at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), and both use 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, yielding the same 28.80 GB/s bandwidth.

The pixel rate and texture rate reflect these differences. The R7 M265 achieves 6.600 GPixel/s and 19.80 GTexel/s, while the FirePro W2100 manages 5.440 GPixel/s and 13.60 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput follows the same pattern: 633.6 GFLOPS for the R7 M265 versus 435.2 GFLOPS for the FirePro W2100. Neither card has recorded RT cores or tensor cores, and both support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

The generations differ as well. The R7 M265 belongs to the "Gem System (R7 M200)" generation, while the FirePro W2100 belongs to the "FirePro GCN (Wx100)" generation. The R7 M265 was released on January 8, 2014, and the FirePro W2100 followed on August 11, 2014. Both are end-of-life products, with the R7 M265's predecessor listed as "Solar System" and its successor as "Polaris Mobile", while the FirePro W2100's predecessor is "FirePro Terascale" and its successor is "Radeon Pro Polaris".

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher OpenCL performance?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M265 scores 4929 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 20.4% higher than the AMD FirePro W2100's 4093 in the same test.

Q: Are these cards based on the same architecture?

A: Yes, both use GCN 1.0 architecture on a 28 nm TSMC process, with 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each card?

A: Both cards have 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth and a 900 MHz memory clock (1800 Mbps effective).

Q: Does the FirePro W2100 have any advantages in the recorded data?

A: The FirePro W2100 has a lower TDP of 26 W, a single-slot form factor, no power connectors, and dual DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. It also has a recorded Vulkan score of 4497, but the R7 M265 has no recorded Vulkan score for comparison.

Q: How do these cards compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The R7 M265's average score of 4929 is essentially tied with the Radeon R7 M360 (4931) and slightly ahead of the FirePro W5130M (4904). The FirePro W2100's average score of 4295 is within 1.3% of the Quadro K3000M (4241) and 0.9% below the RTX 4070 GDDR6 (4335).

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The R7 M265 has 384 shading units, while the FirePro W2100 has 320 shading units.

Where Each One Wins

The R7 M265 wins in every compute-oriented category recorded. Its OpenCL score is 20.4% higher, its shading unit count is 20% higher, its TMU count is 20% higher, its base clock is 95 MHz higher, and its boost clock is 145 MHz higher. Its pixel rate is 6.600 GPixel/s versus 5.440 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 19.80 GTexel/s versus 13.60 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 633.6 GFLOPS versus 435.2 GFLOPS. Any task that scales with shader count, texture throughput, or raw FP32 math will favor the R7 M265. This includes OpenCL-based compute workloads, image processing, and any general-purpose GPU tasks.

The FirePro W2100 wins in the physical and power categories. It has a 26 W TDP, while the R7 M265 has no recorded TDP. It is a single-slot card with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 200 W. It is 168 mm (6.6 inches) long and 69 mm (2.7 inches) tall, dimensions that the R7 M265 does not have recorded. It also has dual DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, which the R7 M265 lacks entirely. For a workstation that needs to drive two DisplayPort monitors from a low-profile, low-power card, the FirePro W2100 is the only option with data supporting that use case.

The FirePro W2100 also has a Vulkan score of 4497 in the database, which is higher than its OpenCL score. This suggests its Vulkan driver path may be relatively more efficient, but since the R7 M265 has no Vulkan score, this cannot be used as a head-to-head advantage. It is simply a data point for the FirePro card alone.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in several key specification fields, while sharing many others. The R7 M265 uses the "Opal" chip, while the FirePro W2100 uses the "Oland" chip. The R7 M265 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs; the FirePro W2100 has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The R7 M265 has a base clock of 725 MHz and a boost clock of 825 MHz; the FirePro W2100 has a base clock of 630 MHz and a boost clock of 680 MHz. The R7 M265 achieves 6.600 GPixel/s pixel rate and 19.80 GTexel/s texture rate; the FirePro W2100 achieves 5.440 GPixel/s and 13.60 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 633.6 GFLOPS for the R7 M265 versus 435.2 GFLOPS for the FirePro W2100.

The FirePro W2100 has a TDP of 26 W, a single-slot width, no power connectors, a suggested PSU of 200 W, dual DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, and dimensions of 168 mm (6.6 inches) by 69 mm (2.7 inches). The R7 M265 has none of these fields recorded. The generations differ: "Gem System (R7 M200)" for the R7 M265 and "FirePro GCN (Wx100)" for the FirePro W2100. Release dates differ: January 8, 2014 for the R7 M265 and August 11, 2014 for the FirePro W2100. Predecessors and successors also differ, as noted earlier. The bus interface is identical (PCIe 3.0 x8), as are the memory specs (2 GB DDR3, 128-bit, 28.80 GB/s), the API support (DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.2.170), the process node (28 nm), the foundry (TSMC), the transistor count (950 million), the die size (77 mm²), and the transistor density (12.3M per mm²).