AMD FirePro W2100 vs AMD Radeon RX 560 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon RX 560 compare to the AMD FirePro W2100 in overall average benchmark score?

A: The RX 560 has an average benchmark score of 4569, while the FirePro W2100 scores 4295. That puts the RX 560 roughly 6.4% higher in aggregate performance, though both cards sit in the same low percentile tier — the RX 560 at the 26th percentile of all GPUs and the FirePro W2100 at the 25th.

Q: Which card wins in the only head-to-head benchmark available?

A: The Geekbench OpenCL test is the sole shared benchmark, and the RX 560 delivers a score of 16472 versus the FirePro W2100's 4093. That is a 302.4% advantage for the RX 560 — more than four times the FirePro's compute output in this workload.

Q: What are the nearest performance rivals for each card, and how close are they?

A: The RX 560's closest rival is the AMD Radeon R5 M230 with an average score of 4577, a delta of -0.2% (essentially tied), followed by the Intel HD Graphics P530 at 4560 (+0.2%). The FirePro W2100's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M at 4282 (+0.3%), with the AMD Radeon Vega 3 close behind at 4268 (+0.6%).

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX and Vulkan versions?

A: No. The RX 560 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the FirePro W2100 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference between the two cards?

A: The RX 560 comes with 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 112.0 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro W2100 has 2 GB of DDR3 memory on the same 128-bit bus, but only achieves 28.80 GB/s bandwidth — a roughly 3.9x gap in memory throughput.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel and texture fill rate?

A: The RX 560 achieves 20.40 GPixel/s pixel rate and 81.60 GTexel/s texture rate. The FirePro W2100 manages 5.440 GPixel/s and 13.60 GTexel/s respectively. The RX 560 is about 3.75x faster in pixel fill and 6x faster in texture fill.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the data, the AMD Radeon RX 560 is the clear performance winner in every measurable category where both cards have results. The Geekbench OpenCL score shows a 302.4% advantage, and the specification gaps in memory bandwidth, shading units, and clock speeds are substantial.

However, the FirePro W2100 is not without a role. Its 26 W TDP versus the RX 560's 75 W TDP, combined with a single-slot design versus dual-slot, makes it the more power-efficient and physically compact option. The FirePro also outputs 2x DisplayPort 1.2, which may suit certain professional multi-monitor setups, whereas the RX 560 offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Picking between them depends on whether raw compute or low-power deployment matters more. The RX 560 is the choice for anyone needing actual graphics or compute performance. The FirePro W2100 is only sensible for constrained environments where minimal power draw and slot footprint outweigh a 4x performance deficit. For any modern workload, the RX 560's 4 GB GDDR5 and GCN 4.0 architecture make it the practical option, despite the FirePro's lower power requirement.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single shared benchmark — Geekbench OpenCL — paints a stark picture. The RX 560 scores 16472, while the FirePro W2100 scores 4093. The delta of 302.4% means the RX 560 delivers roughly quadruple the OpenCL compute performance. This is not a marginal gap; it is a generational leap reflected in the underlying hardware differences.

Looking at the broader benchmark landscape, the RX 560 has nine recorded benchmark scores across Geekbench Metal (18941), Geekbench OpenCL (16472), and Passmark suites ranging from DirectX 9 (57) to DirectX 12 (21), plus G2D (485), G3D (3671), and GPU compute (1437). The FirePro W2100 only has two recorded benchmarks: Geekbench OpenCL (4093) and Geekbench Vulkan (4497). There is no Vulkan score for the RX 560 and no DirectX or Passmark scores for the FirePro, so direct comparison is limited to that one OpenCL test.

The average benchmark scores reinforce the head-to-head result. The RX 560's average of 4569 sits slightly above the FirePro W2100's 4295, a 6.4% overall gap. Interestingly, the RX 560's nearest rival — the R5 M230 at 4577 — is within 0.2%, meaning the RX 560 is effectively tied with a much older mobile part in aggregate. Similarly, the FirePro W2100 is within 0.3% of the GTX 460M, a laptop GPU from a previous era. Neither card is competitive with modern midrange hardware, but the RX 560 is consistently ahead of the FirePro in every overlapping metric.

Specification Differences

The RX 560 uses the Polaris 21 chip built on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process, with 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. The FirePro W2100 uses the Oland chip on TSMC's 28 nm process, with 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die. The transistor density difference is notable: 24.4M per mm² for the RX 560 versus 12.3M per mm² for the FirePro.

Clock speeds diverge sharply. The RX 560 runs at 1175 MHz base and 1275 MHz boost, while the FirePro W2100 runs at 630 MHz base and 680 MHz boost — roughly half the frequency. Memory clocks also differ: the RX 560 uses 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) GDDR5, while the FirePro uses 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) DDR3.

The memory subsystem is a major differentiator. The RX 560 has 4 GB GDDR5 with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth; the FirePro has 2 GB DDR3 with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth. Both use a 128-bit bus, but the memory type and clock speed create a nearly 4x bandwidth advantage for the RX 560.

Compute resources scale similarly. The RX 560 has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The FirePro has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The RX 560's FP32 throughput is 2.611 TFLOPS versus the FirePro's 435.2 GFLOPS — a 6x difference. The RX 560 also lists FP16 at 2.611 TFLOPS (1:1), while the FirePro has no FP16 specification.

Physical differences are moderate. The RX 560 is 170 mm long and dual-slot; the FirePro is 168 mm long, 69 mm tall, and single-slot. Both require no power connectors, but the RX 560 suggests a 250 W PSU versus 200 W for the FirePro. The RX 560's TDP is 75 W; the FirePro's is 26 W.

Architecture Differences

The RX 560 is built on GCN 4.0, the fourth iteration of AMD's Graphics Core Next architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process. The FirePro W2100 uses GCN 1.0, the original GCN design, on a 28 nm process. This architectural gap of three generations explains most of the performance differential beyond raw clock speeds.

The RX 560 belongs to the Polaris (RX 500) generation and is the successor to Arctic Islands, with Vega as its eventual successor. The FirePro W2100 belongs to the FirePro GCN (Wx100) generation, succeeding FirePro Terascale and preceding Radeon Pro Polaris. These are different product lineages: the RX 560 is a consumer gaming-oriented card, while the FirePro W2100 is a workstation-focused product.

Feature support reflects the architectural divide. The RX 560 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the FirePro supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The RX 560's newer GCN 4.0 architecture also enables higher memory efficiency and better compute utilization per clock, as evidenced by its 6x FP32 advantage despite having only 3.2x more shading units.

Display outputs differ: the RX 560 offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a, supporting newer display standards. The FirePro offers 2x DisplayPort 1.2, which may be preferable for multi-monitor professional setups but lacks HDMI and newer DisplayPort revisions.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 560 wins decisively in all performance-oriented scenarios. Its 302.4% OpenCL advantage makes it the clear choice for any compute workload, including OpenCL-based rendering, physics simulation, or general-purpose GPU tasks. The 4 GB GDDR5 memory with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth supports larger textures and datasets than the FirePro's 2 GB DDR3 at 28.80 GB/s. The RX 560 also has modern DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3 support, enabling compatibility with current gaming and graphics APIs.

The FirePro W2100 wins in power-constrained and space-constrained deployments. Its 26 W TDP is less than half the RX 560's 75 W TDP, and its single-slot design occupies less physical space. The dual DisplayPort 1.2 outputs allow dual-monitor setups without adapters, which could be relevant for basic workstation displays. However, its 2 GB DDR3 memory and 435.2 GFLOPS FP32 performance limit it to 2D workloads, basic video playback, or legacy applications.

For gaming, the RX 560's Passmark G3D score of 3671 and DirectX 9 score of 57 indicate playable performance in older titles, while the FirePro has no recorded gaming benchmarks. For professional 3D rendering or GPU compute, the RX 560's 2.611 TFLOPS versus the FirePro's 435.2 GFLOPS is a 6x gap that cannot be overstated. The FirePro's only realistic advantage is in low-power embedded systems or as a basic display adapter where its 26 W TDP and single-slot form factor are assets.

In summary: the RX 560 wins every performance benchmark and specification comparison, while the FirePro W2100 retains niche appeal for ultra-low-power or space-limited configurations. The data does not support choosing the FirePro for any performance-sensitive task.