AMD FirePro W2100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M Comparison

# AMD FirePro W2100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M

The database places the AMD FirePro W2100 and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M in adjacent performance territory. Their average benchmark scores sit within a few percent of each other, and benchmark results show a clear split in workload preferences. The AMD part is a professional workstation card built on the GCN 1.0 architecture, while the NVIDIA part is a mainstream mobile part from the Fermi family. Both are legacy products, no longer in production, but their measured characteristics still show where each design made different choices.

Where Each One Wins

Looking at the head-to-head record in the database, the AMD FirePro W2100 wins the only direct benchmark comparison: a Geekbench OpenCL run where it scores 4093 against the GT 635M’s 3740. That is a 9.4% advantage for the AMD card. Across all recorded workloads, the AMD card wins 1 out of 1 direct comparisons. The NVIDIA part does not take a single win in any recorded benchmark test.

This is a clean sweep for the AMD FirePro W2100 in the recorded tests. The margin is substantial, at 9.4% in the single available head-to-head result. The database also shows the AMD card holding a 25th percentile position among all GPUs, while the GT 635M sits slightly lower at the 22nd percentile. Those percentile gaps are small, but they do place the AMD part ahead of the NVIDIA part in the overall distribution of recorded scores.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural schools. The AMD FirePro W2100 uses the Oland chip, built on the GCN 1.0 architecture. This is a 28 nm part manufactured at TSMC. The die contains 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² slice, giving a transistor density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M, by contrast, is built on the GF108 chip using the Fermi architecture. It is a 40 nm part from TSMC, packing 585 million transistors on a 116 mm² die, which computes to 5.0 million per square millimeter.

The compute resources are heavily skewed toward the AMD part. The FirePro W2100 carries 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 raster output units. The GT 635M has only 96 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 4 ROPs. Memory clocks also differ: the AMD card runs its DDR3 memory at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), while the NVIDIA part runs its DDR3 at the same 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective). Both cards present 2 GB of memory on a 128 bit bus, so both offer 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth.

The AMD card has a higher pixel rate at 5.440 GPixel/s versus 1.900 GPixel/s for the NVIDIA. Its texture rate is 13.60 GTexel/s versus 7.600 GTexel/s. Compute output shows the same pattern: the FirePro reaches 435.2 GFLOPS FP32 against 182.4 GFLOPS for the GeForce. The AMD part is rated at 26 W TDP, the NVIDIA at 35 W. Both have no external power connectors.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher shaded unit count?

A: The AMD FirePro W2100 is well ahead, with 320 shading units. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M only provides 96 shading units.

Q: Do both cards use the same memory type?

A: Yes, both are equipped with 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 128 bit bus. Their memory clocks are also identical at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective).

Q: Which card has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The AMD FirePro W2100 is faster, rated at 5.440 GPixel/s. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M is rated at 1.900 GPixel/s.

Q: What is the released date of the NVIDIA part?

A: The GeForce GT 635M was released on 2012-03-21, while the FirePro W2100 was released on 2014-08-11.

Q: Are both cards out of production?

A: Yes. The AMD FirePro W2100 is marked as end-of-life, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M also has a production status of end-of-life.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD FirePro W2100 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M |

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

| Chip | Oland | GF108 |

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Fermi |

| Process node | 28 nm | 40 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | 950 million | 585 million |

| Die size | 77 mm² | 116 mm² |

| Transistor density | 12.3M / mm² | 5.0M / mm² |

| Base clock | 630 MHz | Not specified |

| Boost clock | 680 MHz | Not specified |

| Memory clock | 900 MHz | 900 MHz |

| Shading units | 320 | 96 |

| TMUs | 20 | 16 |

| ROPs | 8 | 4 |

| Pixel rate | 5.440 GPixel/s | 1.900 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 13.470 GTexel/s | 7.600 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 435.2 GFLOPS | 182.4 GFLOPS |

| Bus interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |

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

| DirectX support | 12 (11_0) | 12 (11_0) |

| OpenGL support | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan support | 1.2.170 | Not specified |

| Length | 168 mm | Not specified |

| Height | 69 mm | Not specified |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single recorded Geekbench OpenCL comparison in the database is decisive. The AMD FirePro W2100 posts a score of 4093, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M posts a score of 3740. The delta is 9.4% in favor of the AMD part. That is the only direct comparison available, and it lines up with the broader average score. The average of the FirePro W2100 across all recorded workloads is 4295. The GT 635M averages 3740. Both cards show a very similar position in the percentile ranking: AMD at the 25th percentile of all GPUs, NVIDIA at the 22nd percentile. Neither part is an outlier; they are both mid-pack parts whose measured performance puts them in the same performance class.

The compute advantage for the AMD part is not limited to raw OpenCL score. Its pixel rate of 5.440 GPixel/s is almost three times the 1.900 GPixel/s of the NVIDIA. The texture rate follows the same pattern: 13.470 GTexel/s for the FirePro, 7.600 GTexel/s for the GT. That is a direct consequence of the wider shading engine: 320 shaders versus 96, and 8 ROPs versus 4 ROPs. The GT 635M only catches up in memory: both parts have 2 GB DDR3 and the same 128 bit bus, so bandwidth is identical at 28.80 GB/s.

Power behavior is interesting. The AMD part is rated at 26 W TDP, the NVIDIA at 20 W TDP. That means the GT 635M delivers its (smaller) feature set within a lower power envelope. The FirePro W2100 has no external power connector and takes all its power from its PCIe 3.0 x8 slot. The GT 635M is a mobile part that also doesn't use a power connector. Both cards are single slot implementations.

FAQ

Q: Does the AMD FirePro W2100 support Vulkan?

A: Yes, the FirePro W2100 supports Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M does not have Vulkan support.

Q: Which card has a higher texture fill rate?

A: The AMD FirePro W2100 has a much higher texture fill rate of 13.470 GTexel/s. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M is rated at 7.600 GTexel/s.

Q: Are both cards the same size of memory?

A: Yes, both cards have 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 128 bit bus.

Q: Which card was released first?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M is the older part, released on 2012-03-21. The AMD FirePro W2100 was released later, on 2014-08-11.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The AMD FirePro W2100 has a TDP of 26 W. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M is rated at 20 W.

The Verdict

The recorded data points in one direction. For anyone running OpenCL based workloads, the AMD FirePro W2100 is the stronger part: it wins the only head-to-head in the database, holds a 9.4% lead in that test, and has a substantial shading, texture, and pixel rate advantage. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M is not without merit: it achieves its lower feature set at a lower TDP (20 W versus 26 W), and it includes support for older DirectX feature levels. But the AMD card is the one with more modern architecture, more execution resources, and the only one with Vulkan driver support.

If the workload is OpenCL compute, the AMD FirePro W2100 is the recommended choice. For a low power mobile GPU with a smaller shader array and no Vulkan support, the GT 635M may still be acceptable for the lightest duties, but the database does not record any workload where it beats the FirePro.