AMD FirePro W5100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 Comparison

The benchmark data places the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 and AMD FirePro W5100 in the same performance tier, with average scores of 12773 and 12847 respectively, yet their individual workload results tell a different story. The GTX 670 demonstrates a decisive lead in both available compute tests, while the FirePro W5100 counters with a superior feature set and drastically lower power requirements. This analysis breaks down where each card excels and for whom each is the better choice.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 wins both benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 670 scores 15341 against the FirePro W5100’s 11888, a margin of 22.5%. This is a substantial gap, indicating the GTX 670’s raw compute throughput is significantly higher in this API. The Vulkan test narrows the gap but still favors NVIDIA: the GTX 670 scores 15553 versus 13805 for the FirePro W5100, a difference of 11.2%. While the FirePro W5100 closes some ground in Vulkan, it remains firmly behind.

These results align with the cards' theoretical specifications. The GTX 670’s shading unit count of 1344 dwarfs the FirePro W5100’s 768, and its texture rate of 109.8 GTexel/s is more than double the FirePro W5100’s 44.64 GTexel/s. The GTX 670 also holds a commanding lead in pixel rate, outputting 27.44 GPixel/s compared to 14.88 GPixel/s. The FirePro W5100’s FP32 performance of 1,428.5 GFLOPS is roughly half of the GTX 670’s 2.634 TFLOPS, which directly explains the OpenCL deficit.

Looking at the broader competitive landscape, both cards sit at the 52nd percentile among all GPUs. The GTX 670’s average score places it 0.4% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 and the AMD Radeon Pro 455, and 0.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT. The FirePro W5100 is 0.1% ahead of the GTX 590 and Radeon Pro 455, and 0.2% behind the AMD Radeon 740M. In essence, these two cards are statistical peers in overall average performance, but the GTX 670’s advantage in the head-to-head tests is clear and consistent.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro W5100 has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 12847, compared to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670’s 12773, a difference of 0.6%.

Q: How does the FirePro W5100 perform in Vulkan relative to the GTX 670?

A: The GTX 670 outperforms the FirePro W5100 in Geekbench Vulkan by 11.2%, with scores of 15553 and 13805 respectively.

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

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 has a memory bandwidth of 192.3 GB/s, which is double the 96.00 GB/s of the AMD FirePro W5100.

Q: Which card requires more power connectors?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 requires two 6-pin power connectors, while the AMD FirePro W5100 requires none.

Q: Does the FirePro W5100 support more display outputs?

A: Yes, the AMD FirePro W5100 features 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, whereas the GTX 670 offers 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2.

Q: What is the difference in transistor count?

A: The GTX 670 houses 3,540 million transistors on its GK104 chip, while the FirePro W5100’s Bonaire chip contains 2,080 million transistors.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 is the clear winner in raw compute performance. Its 22.5% lead in OpenCL and 11.2% lead in Vulkan make it the superior choice for tasks that leverage these APIs, such as general-purpose GPU computing or demanding gaming workloads. The GTX 670’s higher memory bandwidth (192.3 GB/s vs 96.00 GB/s) and larger memory bus (256-bit vs 128-bit) also provide a significant advantage for bandwidth-intensive applications. For users prioritizing maximum throughput in compute or gaming, the GTX 670 is the data-backed choice.

The AMD FirePro W5100 wins in the areas of efficiency and system integration. Its TDP of 50 W is less than a third of the GTX 670’s 170 W, and it requires no external power connectors, making it a drop-in solution for systems with a suggested 250 W PSU. In contrast, the GTX 670 needs a 450 W PSU and dual 6-pin connectors. The FirePro W5100 also offers four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, enabling multi-monitor setups without adapters, whereas the GTX 670’s mix of DVI, HDMI, and a single DisplayPort is less flexible for professional display configurations. For a workstation environment prioritizing low power draw and multi-display output, the FirePro W5100 is the winner.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge significantly on core specifications. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 features 1344 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, while the AMD FirePro W5100 has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Clock speeds differ as well: the GTX 670 has a base clock of 915 MHz and a boost clock of 980 MHz, whereas the FirePro W5100 has no listed base or boost clock. Memory configurations are also different: the FirePro W5100 offers 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, while the GTX 670 provides 2 GB on a 256-bit bus. This results in a bandwidth of 96.00 GB/s for AMD and 192.3 GB/s for NVIDIA.

Physical dimensions and power requirements separate the cards further. The FirePro W5100 is a single-slot card measuring 173 mm in length, while the GTX 670 is a dual-slot card at 241 mm long and 38 mm wide. The GTX 670 has a TDP of 170 W and requires a 450 W PSU, while the FirePro W5100 sips at 50 W and needs only a 250 W PSU. The FirePro W5100 has no power connectors, but the GTX 670 requires two 6-pin connectors. Finally, the FirePro W5100 outputs 4x DisplayPort 1.2, whereas the GTX 670 offers 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is generational and philosophical. The AMD FirePro W5100 is built on the GCN 2.0 architecture with the Bonaire chip, part of the FirePro GCN (Wx100) generation. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 uses the Kepler architecture with the GK104 chip, from the GeForce 600 generation. Both are fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but the die sizes differ: the GTX 670’s die is 294 mm², while the FirePro W5100’s is 160 mm². The GTX 670 packs more transistors (3,540 million vs 2,080 million), resulting in a slightly lower transistor density of 12.0M / mm² versus 13.0M / mm² for the FirePro W5100.

API support also differs. The FirePro W5100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the GTX 670 supports DirectX 12 (11_0). Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan, but the GTX 670 has a slightly newer Vulkan version (1.2.175 vs 1.2.170). Notably, the GTX 670 has a Geekbench Metal score of 7424, a test the FirePro W5100 does not have, suggesting Apple ecosystem compatibility for the NVIDIA card. The FirePro W5100’s predecessor is FirePro Terascale and its successor is Radeon Pro Polaris, while the GTX 670’s predecessor is GeForce 500 and its successor is GeForce 700.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split decision based on use case. For raw performance in OpenCL and Vulkan workloads, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 is the definitive choice. It leads by 22.5% in OpenCL and 11.2% in Vulkan, and its superior texture rate, pixel rate, and memory bandwidth make it the stronger card for any compute-heavy or gaming scenario. Its 2 GB of memory is a limitation, but for tasks that fit within that frame, the GTX 670’s performance is unmatched in this comparison.

The AMD FirePro W5100 is the choice for professional workstation environments where power efficiency and display connectivity are paramount. Its 50 W TDP, lack of power connectors, and single-slot design make it an easy fit for dense systems, while its 4 GB of VRAM and four DisplayPort outputs cater to multi-monitor setups. The 4 GB frame buffer is double the GTX 670’s, which could be a deciding factor for memory-heavy professional applications despite the lower compute throughput. Its launch date was later (2014 vs 2012), and it has no launch MSRP listed, while the GTX 670 launched at 399 USD. Ultimately, the GTX 670 wins on speed; the FirePro W5100 wins on efficiency and display flexibility. Choose accordingly based on which metric matters more for your workload.