AMD FirePro W5000 vs AMD Radeon 550X Comparison

The AMD FirePro W5000 and AMD Radeon 550X represent two distinct eras of AMD’s graphics architecture, separated by nearly seven years of process technology and design philosophy. The data shows a clear, albeit narrow, overall performance winner, but the underlying specifications reveal a more nuanced story about efficiency, modern API support, and intended workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it shows the older FirePro W5000 taking a decisive lead. The FirePro W5000 scores 9803, while the Radeon 550X trails with 8866. This translates to a 10.6% advantage for the FirePro W5000, a substantial margin in synthetic compute workloads. This result is surprising given the generational gap, but it aligns with the FirePro’s workstation-oriented design, which prioritizes raw compute throughput over power efficiency.

Looking at the broader benchmark landscape, the FirePro W5000’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070, which scores 9780, a mere 0.2% behind the FirePro. This places the FirePro in a performance tier alongside a card that is generally considered a high-end consumer GPU from a later generation. The Quadro M2000M and Quadro 6000 are also close, with scores of 9832 and 9846, respectively, putting them 0.3% and 0.4% ahead of the FirePro. This clustering suggests that the FirePro W5000, despite its age, still delivers competitive compute performance in its niche.

The Radeon 550X, conversely, is bracketed by lower-tier competitors. Its closest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100, which scores 8863, just 0.6% behind the 550X. The Radeon R9 M265X is also nearby at 8851, a 0.8% deficit. On the other side, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 scores 9022, which is 1.2% ahead of the 550X, and the NVIDIA TITAN V CEO Edition scores 9037, a 1.3% advantage. These deltas are small, indicating that the 550X sits in a tightly contested mid-range bracket where minor architectural differences can shift rankings.

In the head-to-head matchup, the FirePro W5000 wins the sole benchmark, giving it a 1–0 victory in the win column. The Radeon 550X does not secure a win in any recorded test. However, this is a limited dataset; the 550X has an additional Vulkan benchmark score of 8970, which is higher than its OpenCL score of 8866, suggesting that its performance is API-dependent and may be more favorable in modern graphics workloads.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial. The FirePro W5000 is built on the Pitcairn chip using the GCN 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 2,800 million transistors onto a 212 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 13.2 million per square millimeter. In contrast, the Radeon 550X uses the Lexa chip with GCN 4.0 architecture, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It contains 2,200 million transistors on a much smaller 103 mm² die, achieving a far higher density of 21.4 million per square millimeter. This density increase is a direct benefit of the newer process node, allowing more transistors per area despite the lower total count.

The core configurations differ significantly. The FirePro W5000 features 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The Radeon 550X, meanwhile, has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This means the FirePro has 50% more shading units and double the ROPs, which explains its higher fillrate and compute capabilities. The pixel rate for the FirePro is 26.40 GPixel/s, compared to 19.49 GPixel/s for the 550X. Texture rate is closer: 39.60 GTexel/s versus 38.98 GTexel/s, indicating that texture throughput is nearly identical despite the difference in unit counts.

Memory subsystems also diverge. Both cards have 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, but the FirePro uses a 256-bit bus width, yielding a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The 550X uses a 128-bit bus, which is narrower, but its memory clock is higher at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) compared to the FirePro’s 800 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective). This results in a slightly higher bandwidth for the 550X at 112.0 GB/s. The clock speeds on the GPUs themselves are only listed for the 550X, with a base of 1082 MHz and a boost of 1218 MHz; the FirePro’s clocks are not provided in the data.

The FirePro W5000 has a TDP of 75 W, while the 550X is more efficient at 50 W. This efficiency comes from the newer process node and lower transistor count. The 550X also supports a wider range of modern APIs: it lists DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, whereas the FirePro lists DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The 550X also supports FP16 compute at 1,247.2 GFLOPS (1:1), while the FirePro has no FP16 data. The FirePro’s FP32 output is 1,267.2 GFLOPS, slightly higher than the 550X’s 1,247.2 GFLOPS.

Physical differences are notable. The FirePro is a single-slot card measuring 183 mm in length, while the 550X is a dual-slot card at 145 mm. The FirePro offers 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, whereas the 550X provides 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a. The bus interface also differs: the FirePro uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the 550X uses PCIe 3.0 x8, which may limit bandwidth in some scenarios.

The Verdict

The benchmark data clearly favors the AMD FirePro W5000 in raw compute performance. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 9803 is 10.6% higher than the Radeon 550X’s 8866, and it also achieves a higher percentile ranking at 47 versus 45 for the 550X. The FirePro’s average benchmark score is 9803, while the 550X averages 8918 across its two recorded tests. If the priority is maximum OpenCL compute throughput, the FirePro W5000 is the data-backed choice.

However, the Radeon 550X is not without merit. Its lower TDP of 50 W versus 75 W makes it a more power-efficient option. It also supports a more modern feature set, including DirectX 12 (12_0), Vulkan 1.3, and FP16 compute, which the FirePro lacks. The 550X’s Vulkan score of 8970 is higher than its OpenCL score, suggesting that it may perform relatively better in Vulkan-based applications. For users prioritizing API compatibility and efficiency, the 550X is the logical pick.

The FirePro W5000’s launch MSRP was 599 USD, a figure that reflects its workstation positioning. The 550X has no listed launch MSRP. The FirePro’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070, is only 0.2% behind, which contextualizes its performance as comparable to a much newer high-end card. The 550X’s rivals are all within a 1.3% delta, indicating a more crowded and competitive mid-range field.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD FirePro W5000 scores 9803, which is 10.6% higher than the AMD Radeon 550X’s score of 8866.

Q: Does the Radeon 550X support any API that the FirePro W5000 does not?

A: Yes, the Radeon 550X supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the FirePro W5000 only supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: How do the memory bandwidths compare between the two cards?

A: The Radeon 550X has a higher memory bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s, while the FirePro W5000 has a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The FirePro W5000 has a TDP of 75 W, whereas the Radeon 550X has a lower TDP of 50 W.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The Radeon 550X has a transistor density of 21.4M / mm², which is higher than the FirePro W5000’s 13.2M / mm².

Q: How does the FirePro W5000 compare to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070?

A: The FirePro W5000 scores 9803, which is 0.2% higher than the GTX 1070’s average score of 9780.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro W5000 wins decisively in compute-bound scenarios that rely on OpenCL. Its 10.6% lead over the Radeon 550X in Geekbench OpenCL, combined with its higher pixel rate (26.40 GPixel/s versus 19.49 GPixel/s) and FP32 throughput (1,267.2 GFLOPS versus 1,247.2 GFLOPS), makes it the stronger choice for tasks like scientific simulation, rendering, or any workload that exercises raw parallel processing. Its 256-bit memory bus, despite lower clock speeds, provides robust bandwidth for large datasets. The FirePro also holds a percentile advantage, ranking in the 47th percentile versus the 550X’s 45th, and its nearest rivals include the GTX 1070, indicating it punches above its generational weight class.

The AMD Radeon 550X wins on efficiency and modern feature support. Its 50 W TDP is 33% lower than the FirePro’s 75 W, making it a better fit for compact or power-constrained systems. It also offers a more current API stack, including DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, which are essential for contemporary games and applications. The 550X’s support for FP16 compute at 1,247.2 GFLOPS (1:1) is a capability the FirePro lacks entirely, making it more versatile for AI inference or media processing that leverages half-precision. Its dual-slot design and shorter 145 mm length may also be easier to accommodate in smaller chassis, and its higher memory bandwidth (112.0 GB/s) gives it a slight edge in memory-intensive tasks despite the narrower bus. The 550X’s Vulkan score of 8970, while lower than the FirePro’s OpenCL score, suggests it is better optimized for Vulkan workloads, where the FirePro has no comparable data.