AMD FirePro W5000 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M Comparison

The AMD FirePro W5000 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M are two very different products from different eras, yet they land in a surprisingly close performance bracket. The data shows a clear split: the FirePro is a desktop workstation card from AMD’s GCN 1.0 generation, while the GTX 850M is a mobile gaming chip from NVIDIA’s Maxwell family. Their benchmark scores are nearly identical in one key test, but their architectural and specification sheets tell a story of divergent design goals. This analysis separates the raw numbers from the context of what each card was built to do.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are extraordinarily tight. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M scores 9,821, while the AMD FirePro W5000 scores 9,803. This gives the GTX 850M a marginal victory with a delta of -0.2% from the FirePro’s perspective (meaning the FirePro is 0.2% behind). In practical terms, this is a statistical dead heat; the difference of 18 points is negligible in real-world OpenCL workloads. The data shows the GTX 850M wins the only head-to-head test, but the margin is far too small to declare a meaningful performance leader.

Looking at how each card stacks against its own nearest rivals provides more context. The FirePro W5000 sits at the 47th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 9,803. Its closest competitor is the NVIDIA Quadro M2000M, which scores 9,832 (a -0.3% delta for the FirePro), and it edges out the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070, which scores 9,780 (a 0.2% delta in the FirePro’s favor). This places the FirePro in a dense pack of mid-range performers where a few points separate cards from entirely different market segments.

The GTX 850M, meanwhile, holds the 46th percentile with an average score of 9,302 — that average is pulled down by its additional Vulkan benchmark score of 8,782, which is notably lower than its OpenCL result. Its nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R7 M380, which scores 9,313 (a -0.1% delta), and it leads the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 by a 0.3% margin (9,273). The GTX 850M also outperforms the AMD Radeon Vega 8 by 0.9% (9,221). The data suggests that while the GTX 850M wins its sole head-to-head against the FirePro, its overall average is dragged down by weaker Vulkan performance, making the OpenCL tie less representative of overall capability.

The single benchmark result masks a deeper story. In OpenCL, these two cards are effectively interchangeable in terms of raw compute scores. However, the GTX 850M’s Vulkan score of 8,782 indicates a significant gap between API performance levels, while the FirePro has no Vulkan benchmark recorded. This suggests that the FirePro’s OpenCL score may be its peak, whereas the GTX 850M has a dual-mode performance profile that varies more widely depending on the workload.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is substantial, starting with the chip design. The AMD FirePro W5000 uses the Pitcairn chip built on GCN 1.0 architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process. It packs 2,800 million transistors onto a 212 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 13.2M per mm². The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M uses the GM107 chip on the Maxwell architecture, also built by TSMC on a 28 nm process, but with fewer resources: 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, giving a density of 12.6M per mm².

The compute resources differ in configuration. The FirePro W5000 carries 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 raster operations pipelines (ROPs). The GTX 850M has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and only 16 ROPs. These numbers translate directly to theoretical fill rates: the FirePro achieves 26.40 GPixel/s in pixel rate and 39.60 GTexel/s in texture rate, while the GTX 850M manages 14.43 GPixel/s and 36.08 GTexel/s respectively. The FirePro’s ROP advantage is nearly double, which explains its large lead in pixel throughput despite similar texture rates.

Floating-point performance tells a similar story. The FirePro W5000 delivers 1,267.2 GFLOPS in FP32, while the GTX 850M produces 1,154.6 GFLOPS. The FirePro’s 9.8% lead in raw FP32 compute is modest but consistent with its higher shading unit count. Neither card has dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores, and both lack FP16 support in the data. The memory subsystem is where the cards diverge most sharply. The FirePro uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth at 800 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective). The GTX 850M uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, yielding just 32.03 GB/s at 1001 MHz (2 Gbps effective). The FirePro’s bandwidth advantage is more than 3x, which is critical for memory-bound workloads.

Power and physical design also differ. The FirePro W5000 has a 75 W TDP, requires a 250 W suggested PSU, and is a single-slot card with no external power connectors. It measures 183 mm in length and 111 mm in height. The GTX 850M has a 45 W TDP, is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no slot width, and has no suggested PSU rating. Its dimensions are not listed, reflecting its mobile, soldered design. The FirePro is clearly a desktop card designed for workstation reliability, while the GTX 850M is a laptop part optimized for power efficiency.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M scores 9,821 in Geekbench OpenCL, narrowly edging out the AMD FirePro W5000’s 9,803. The delta is -0.2% from the FirePro’s perspective, making the difference negligible.

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The AMD FirePro W5000 has 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth from 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M has 32.03 GB/s from 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus. The FirePro offers more than three times the bandwidth.

Q: Which card supports more advanced graphics APIs?

A: The AMD FirePro W5000 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA card supports a newer Vulkan version, while the AMD card has a slightly higher DirectX feature level.

Q: What are the transistor counts of each chip?

A: The AMD FirePro W5000’s Pitcairn chip contains 2,800 million transistors, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M’s GM107 chip contains 1,870 million transistors. The FirePro’s chip is larger both in transistor count and die size (212 mm² vs 148 mm²).

Q: Is the GTX 850M faster in pixel fill rate?

A: No. The AMD FirePro W5000 achieves 26.40 GPixel/s, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M achieves 14.43 GPixel/s. The FirePro’s 32 ROPs versus the GTX 850M’s 16 ROPs drive this advantage.

Q: What is the form factor of each card?

A: The AMD FirePro W5000 is a single-slot desktop card with no power connectors, measuring 183 mm in length. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no listed dimensions, indicating a mobile or embedded design.

The Verdict

The data points to two distinct use cases. The AMD FirePro W5000 is the better choice for compute-heavy tasks that rely on memory bandwidth and pixel throughput. Its 102.4 GB/s bandwidth dwarfs the GTX 850M’s 32.03 GB/s, and its 26.40 GPixel/s pixel rate is nearly double. For OpenCL workloads that stress texture fill and ROP performance, the FirePro’s 48 TMUs and 32 ROPs give it a structural advantage that the near-identical OpenCL score does not fully capture. Its 1,267.2 GFLOPS FP32 output is also higher than the GTX 850M’s 1,154.6 GFLOPS, reinforcing its lead in raw compute.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M is the more modern part in some respects, with support for Vulkan 1.4 compared to the FirePro’s Vulkan 1.2.170, and it consumes less power at 45 W versus 75 W. Its 1,870 million transistors on a smaller 148 mm² die indicate a more efficient design per square millimeter, even if the transistor density is slightly lower. However, its 128-bit memory bus and DDR3 memory severely limit its bandwidth, and its 16 ROPs cap its pixel throughput. The GTX 850M’s average benchmark score of 9,302 is lower than its OpenCL score of 9,821, suggesting inconsistent performance across different APIs.

For a workstation user prioritizing compute consistency and memory bandwidth, the FirePro W5000 is the data-backed pick. For a mobile user needing a low-power, API-versatile part, the GTX 850M makes sense. The head-to-head OpenCL result is a tie, but the specification differences reveal that the FirePro is built for sustained, memory-intensive workloads, while the GTX 850M is a balanced mobile chip that happens to match it in one synthetic test. The FirePro’s 47th percentile ranking versus the GTX 850M’s 46th percentile is a fair summary: they are peers in the aggregate, but their strengths lie in different areas.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FirePro W5000 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M |

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

| Chip | Pitcairn | GM107 |

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Maxwell |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 2,800 million | 1,870 million |

| Die Size | 212 mm² | 148 mm² |

| Memory | 2 GB GDDR5 | 2 GB DDR3 |

| Memory Bus | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 102.4 GB/s | 32.03 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 768 | 640 |

| TMUs | 48 | 40 |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 26.40 GPixel/s | 14.43 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 39.60 GTexel/s | 36.08 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,267.2 GFLOPS | 1,154.6 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 75 W | 45 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | IGP |

| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2012-08-06 | 2014-03-11 |

| Launch MSRP | 599 USD | None |