AMD FirePro W5100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database records two direct comparisons between the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 and the AMD FirePro W5100, and in both instances the NVIDIA card comes out ahead by a substantial margin.

In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GeForce GTX 680 scores 16,906 points against the FirePro W5100's 11,888 points. This represents a 42.2% advantage for the NVIDIA part. The gap is significant enough to place the two cards in different performance tiers, even though their overall percentile rankings among all GPUs are relatively close (55th percentile for the GTX 680 versus 52nd for the FirePro W5100). The OpenCL score matters for general-purpose compute workloads, where the GTX 680's larger shader array and higher throughput directly translate into faster execution.

The Vulkan test shows a similar but slightly narrower margin. The GeForce GTX 680 scores 17,646 points, while the FirePro W5100 trails at 13,805 points, a 27.8% difference. Vulkan performance reflects both raw compute capabilities and driver efficiency with the API. The GTX 680 maintains its lead here, but the smaller gap suggests the FirePro W5100 is relatively more competitive in this workload compared to OpenCL.

Looking at average benchmark scores across all recorded tests, the GTX 680 averages 14,150 points, placing it near the NVIDIA Tesla K10 (14,029, 0.9% behind) and the GeForce GTX 1070 Ti (14,277, 0.9% ahead). The FirePro W5100 averages 12,847 points, sitting close to the AMD Radeon Pro 455 (12,831, 0.1% behind) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 (12,830, 0.1% behind). The difference between the two cards in this comparison, roughly 1,300 points, is larger than the typical spacing between adjacent rivals in either card's own ranking.

Where Each One Wins

The GeForce GTX 680 wins both recorded head-to-head benchmarks, so there is no test in the database where the FirePro W5100 comes out ahead. That said, the use-case split is not entirely one-sided when looking at the broader specifications.

The GTX 680 is the clear choice for compute-heavy workloads that rely on OpenCL or Vulkan. Its 3.250 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, compared with the FirePro W5100's 1,428.5 GFLOPS (which is approximately 1.43 TFLOPS), gives it more than double the theoretical floating-point throughput. Texture fill rates also favor the GTX 680 heavily: 135.4 GTexel/s versus 44.64 GTexel/s. For tasks that involve a lot of texture sampling or pixel shading, the GTX 680 will complete the job in a fraction of the time.

The FirePro W5100, despite its lower compute numbers, does have one hardware advantage: 4 GB of memory versus 2 GB on the GTX 680. This matters for workloads that require large data sets to reside on the GPU, such as certain rendering, simulation, or video editing tasks. However, the FirePro W5100's memory bandwidth is much lower at 96.00 GB/s versus 192.3 GB/s for the GTX 680, so any memory-heavy task that fits within 2 GB will still run faster on the GTX 680. The bigger frame buffer on the FirePro W5100 serves only when the data set exceeds 2 GB, at which point the GTX 680 cannot participate at all.

Another area where the FirePro W5100 has an edge is power consumption, with a 50 W TDP versus 195 W for the GTX 680. This means the FirePro W5100 can be used in systems with smaller power supplies (250 W suggested versus 450 W) and does not require auxiliary power connectors. For a workstation or server where heat and power are constrained, the FirePro W5100 is the more practical option, even if it loses on raw speed.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from fundamentally different architectures. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 uses the GK104 chip based on the Kepler architecture, while the AMD FirePro W5100 uses the Bonaire chip based on GCN 2.0.

Both are fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but the chips differ in scale. The GK104 contains 3,540 million transistors on a die size of 294 mm², yielding a transistor density of 12.0M per mm². The Bonaire chip is smaller, with 2,080 million transistors on a 160 mm² die, giving a higher density of 13.0M per mm². Despite being physically smaller, the Bonaire chip is more densely packed, though it has far fewer execution units.

The shader configurations are drastically different. The GTX 680 has 1,536 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The FirePro W5100 has 768 shading units, 48 texture units, and 16 ROPs. The GTX 680 has twice as many shading units and ROPs, and more than double the texture units. These ratios directly explain the measured performance gaps.

The Kepler architecture in the GTX 680 is designed around high clock speeds and efficiency per clock. The GCN 2.0 architecture in the FirePro W5100 is designed for compute-heavy workloads, with a focus on minimizing instruction overhead and maximizing occupancy. In practice, the data shows that the GCN 2.0 design did not close the gap against Kepler in these particular workloads.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in several key specification fields. The GTX 680 has a base clock of 1006 MHz and a boost clock of 1058 MHz, while the FirePro W5100 does not have recorded base or boost clock values in the database. Memory clocks show a small difference: the GTX 680 runs at 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective), and the FirePro W5100 runs at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective), which is essentially the same for the memory clock itself, but the memory subsystem is different.

Memory capacity: 2 GB on the GTX 680 versus 4 GB on the FirePro W5100. Memory bus width: 256 bit versus 128 bit. Memory bandwidth: 192.3 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s.

Power characteristics: the GTX 680 has a 195 W TDP, requires a dual-slot cooler, and needs two 6-pin power connectors. The FirePro W5100 has a 50 W TDP, is a single-slot card, and needs no power connectors. The suggested PSU is 450 W for the GTX 680 and 250 W for the FirePro W5100.

Physical dimensions differ: the GTX 680 is 256 mm long, 111 mm high, and 38 mm wide. The FirePro W5100 is 173 mm long and 111 mm high, with no width recorded. The GTX 680 is therefore much longer, while both share the same height.

Display outputs are different as well. The GTX 680 has 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2. The FirePro W5100 has 4x DisplayPort 1.2, which is a more modern and workstation-oriented output set.

API support: the GTX 680 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The FirePro W5100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The key difference is the DirectX 12 feature level, where the FirePro W5100 has a higher 12_0 level versus 11_0 for the GTX 680.

The GTX 680 was released on 2012-03-21, and the FirePro W5100 on 2014-03-30. Both are end-of-life. The GTX 680 has a recorded launch MSRP of 499 USD. The FirePro W5100 has no recorded launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw compute performance?

A: The GeForce GTX 680 has a FP32 throughput of 3.250 TFLOPS, while the FirePro W5100 has 1,428.5 GFLOPS. The GTX 680 is approximately 2.3 times faster in this metric.

Q: Which card has more memory?

A: The AMD FirePro W5100 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, double the 2 GB on the GTX 680. However, the GTX 680 has higher bandwidth at 192.3 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s.

Q: Can the FirePro W5100 be used in a system with a lower power supply?

A: Yes. The FirePro W5100 has a 50 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 250 W, with no power connectors required. The GTX 680 has a 195 W TDP, requires two 6-pin connectors, and suggests a 450 W PSU.

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the FirePro W5100 wins?

A: In the recorded head-to-head benchmarks, the FirePro W5100 does not win any. The GTX 680 wins both the OpenCL and Vulkan tests, with deltas of 42.2% and 27.8% respectively.

Q: What is the difference in pixel rate?

A: The GTX 680 has a pixel rate of 33.86 GPixel/s, while the FirePro W5100 has 14.88 GPixel/s. The GTX 680 is more than twice as fast in this attribute.

Q: Which card supports a higher DirectX version?

A: The AMD FirePro W5100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the NVIDIA GTX 680 supports DirectX 12 (11_0). The FirePro W5100 has a more recent feature level.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 for any workload that depends on raw compute or texture throughput. In the two direct benchmark comparisons, the GTX 680 leads by 42.2% in OpenCL and 27.8% in Vulkan. Its average benchmark score of 14,150 is higher than the FirePro W5100's 12,847, and it sits in the 55th percentile versus the 52nd for the FirePro W5100. The GTX 680 has double the shading units, more than double the texture units, and more than double the FP32 performance.

The AMD FirePro W5100 is the sensible pick for environments where power draw and physical space are the primary constraints. It draws 50 W versus 195 W, fits in a single slot, and has no power connectors or PSU requirement beyond 250 W. Its 4 GB memory is also double the GTX 680's 2 GB, which is the only hardware attribute where it leads.

For a user building a system where compute speed matters and power is not a concern, the GTX 680 is the definitive choice. For a user with a small form factor, low-power system or a workstation with many cards, the FirePro W5100 offers a more efficient but slower alternative. The GTX 680 wins on every performance metric recorded, but the FirePro W5100 wins on efficiency and memory capacity. The choice depends entirely on which constraint matters more.