AMD FirePro W5100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two shared benchmark tests for these cards, and the results tell a story of two very different performance profiles. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN posts a score of 24,873 against the AMD FirePro W5100's 11,888. That is a decisive 109.2% advantage, meaning the TITAN more than doubles the FirePro's compute throughput in this particular workload. The margin is enormous, and it reflects the raw scale of the two designs: the TITAN carries 2,688 shading units, 224 texture units, and 48 ROPs, while the FirePro W5100 has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The OpenCL result aligns with that hardware disparity, as the TITAN's FP32 throughput of 4.709 TFLOPS dwarfs the FirePro's 1,428.5 GFLOPS.

However, the Vulkan benchmark flips the script entirely. Here, the AMD FirePro W5100 scores 13,805, while the NVIDIA card manages only 10,027. That gives the FirePro a 27.4% lead in the opposite direction, a remarkable reversal given the TITAN's massive hardware advantage. The Vulkan delta is not a small edge; it is a substantial victory for the smaller, lower-power card. This suggests that architectural efficiency and driver optimization for Vulkan matter more than raw shader counts or memory bandwidth in this test. The TITAN's Kepler architecture, originally designed for the GeForce 700 generation, appears to handle Vulkan less gracefully, while the FirePro's GCN 2.0 implementation punches above its weight class.

The head-to-head record is exactly split: one win for each card. That parity is unusual when the hardware specifications differ so dramatically, and it underscores that benchmark scores do not always follow a linear progression with transistor counts or memory bus widths. The data shows a 109.2% gap in one direction and a 27.4% gap in the other, so neither card can claim universal superiority based on these two metrics alone.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN dominates in compute-heavy, OpenCL-based workloads. Its 24,873 OpenCL score places it in a league well above the FirePro's 11,888, and this is directly attributable to the TITAN's larger execution resources. With 6 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus delivering 288.4 GB/s of bandwidth, the TITAN can feed its 2,688 shaders at a rate the FirePro cannot match. The FirePro's 4 GB frame buffer on a 128-bit bus provides 96.00 GB/s, roughly one-third of the TITAN's bandwidth. For tasks that rely on raw parallel floating-point math, such as scientific simulation, video encoding, or certain rendering workloads, the TITAN's OpenCL result indicates it is the clear choice. The 109.2% delta means the TITAN finishes more than twice as fast in those scenarios.

The AMD FirePro W5100, conversely, wins decisively in Vulkan-based applications. Its 13,805 score against the TITAN's 10,027 is a 27.4% margin, and that is not a trivial difference. Vulkan is a low-overhead API that rewards efficient command processing and driver optimization over sheer hardware muscle. The FirePro's GCN 2.0 architecture, with its asynchronous compute capabilities and leaner design, appears better suited to Vulkan's explicit programming model. The FirePro also consumes only 50 W of power versus the TITAN's 250 W, and it requires no external power connectors, fitting into a single-slot profile. For workstation environments that prioritize Vulkan-based visualization, CAD, or game development tools, the FirePro's benchmark lead in this API is the deciding factor.

The average benchmark scores reflect this split. The TITAN's average across all recorded tests is 14,373, while the FirePro's average is 12,847. That difference of roughly 12% is modest compared to the individual test deltas, because the two tests pull in opposite directions. The TITAN sits at the 56th percentile among all GPUs in the database, and the FirePro sits at the 52nd, so both are mid-pack performers overall, but their strengths are concentrated in different API ecosystems.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from completely different design philosophies. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN uses the GK110 chip on the Kepler architecture, built on TSMC's 28 nm process. It packs 7,080 million transistors onto a 561 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.6 million per square millimeter. That is a massive chip by any measure, and it explains the TITAN's 250 W TDP and dual-slot cooler requirement. The FirePro W5100, in contrast, uses the Bonaire chip on GCN 2.0, also on a 28 nm TSMC process, but with only 2,080 million transistors on a 160 mm² die. Its transistor density is slightly higher at 13.0 million per square millimeter, but the total resources are far smaller. The FirePro's 50 W TDP and single-slot design make it a low-profile workstation card, whereas the TITAN demands a 600 W suggested power supply and dual-slot space.

Memory architecture differs sharply. The TITAN has 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit interface, providing 288.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit interface, yielding 96.00 GB/s. Both use GDDR5 with 6 Gbps effective memory speed, but the bus width difference is the decisive factor. The TITAN also has far more execution units: 2,688 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, versus 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs on the FirePro. Pixel rate and texture rate follow accordingly: the TITAN achieves 49.06 GPixel/s and 196.2 GTexel/s, while the FirePro manages 14.88 GPixel/s and 44.64 GTexel/s.

Feature support also diverges. The TITAN lists DirectX 12 (11_0) support, while the FirePro offers DirectX 12 (12_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but Vulkan versions differ: the TITAN has Vulkan 1.2.175, and the FirePro has Vulkan 1.2.170. Display outputs are another differentiator: the TITAN provides 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2, while the FirePro offers 4x DisplayPort 1.2, making it more suited to multi-monitor workstation setups. The TITAN has a launch MSRP of 999 USD, while the FirePro has no recorded launch price. The TITAN measures 267 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 38 mm in width, while the FirePro is shorter at 173 mm with the same 111 mm height, and its width is not recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN has an average score of 14,373 across all recorded benchmarks, compared to the AMD FirePro W5100's 12,847. That puts the TITAN about 12% higher on average, but the individual test results vary widely.

Q: Why does the FirePro W5100 win in Vulkan despite having far fewer shading units?

A: The FirePro W5100 scores 13,805 in Geekbench Vulkan versus the TITAN's 10,027, a 27.4% margin. The FirePro's GCN 2.0 architecture and Vulkan 1.2.170 driver implementation appear to handle the API more efficiently than the TITAN's Kepler design with Vulkan 1.2.175, despite the latter having 2,688 shading units versus 768.

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

A: The TITAN provides 288.4 GB/s through a 384-bit memory bus, while the FirePro W5100 delivers 96.00 GB/s over a 128-bit bus. Both use GDDR5 memory at 6 Gbps effective, but the TITAN's wider interface gives it three times the bandwidth.

Q: Which card consumes less power and requires less cooling?

A: The FirePro W5100 has a 50 W TDP, is single-slot, and requires no external power connectors, with a suggested power supply of 250 W. The TITAN has a 250 W TDP, is dual-slot, needs 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connectors, and requires a 600 W power supply.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No, both are end-of-life products. The TITAN was released on 2013-02-18 and its successor is the GeForce 900 series. The FirePro W5100 was released on 2014-03-30 and its successor is the Radeon Pro Polaris line.

Q: How do these cards compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The TITAN's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 (average score 14,385, delta -0.1%), the AMD Radeon Vega 11 (14,352, delta 0.1%), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M (14,404, delta -0.2%). The FirePro W5100's nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon Pro 455 (12,831, delta 0.1%) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 (12,830, delta 0.1%).

The Verdict

The data presents a clear but context-dependent choice. For any workload that leverages OpenCL, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN is the overwhelming pick. Its 109.2% advantage in that benchmark is not incremental; it is a doubling of performance. The TITAN's 6 GB frame buffer, 288.4 GB/s bandwidth, and 4.709 TFLOPS FP32 throughput make it a compute powerhouse that the FirePro cannot approach. Users running scientific simulations, heavy rendering, or any OpenCL-accelerated application should choose the TITAN without hesitation, provided they can accommodate its 250 W power draw and dual-slot size.

For Vulkan-centric workloads, the AMD FirePro W5100 is the superior option. Its 27.4% lead in Geekbench Vulkan indicates that the architecture handles this API more efficiently, and its 50 W TDP, single-slot profile, and 4x DisplayPort outputs make it an attractive card for workstation environments where space and power are constrained. The FirePro also supports DirectX 12 (12_0) compared to the TITAN's DirectX 12 (11_0), which may matter for certain modern applications.

Neither card is a universal winner. The TITAN's average score is higher, but the FirePro's Vulkan victory keeps the head-to-head record at one win each. The choice rests entirely on which API the user cares about. If the workload is OpenCL-heavy, the TITAN is the only rational option. If Vulkan is the priority, the FirePro delivers better results with a fraction of the power draw. The data does not support a single "best" card; it supports two cards optimized for different ecosystems.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN | AMD FirePro W5100 |

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

| Chip | GK110 | Bonaire |

| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 2.0 |

| Generation | GeForce 700 | FirePro GCN (Wx100) |

| Transistors | 7,080 million | 2,080 million |

| Die Size | 561 mm² | 160 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.6M / mm² | 13.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 836 MHz | Not recorded |

| Boost Clock | 876 MHz | Not recorded |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 288.4 GB/s | 96.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2,688 | 768 |

| Texture Mapping Units | 224 | 48 |

| Raster Operation Units | 48 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 49.06 GPixel/s | 14.88 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 196.2 GTexel/s | 44.64 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 4.709 TFLOPS | 1,428.5 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 250 W | 50 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | 250 W |

| Display Outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2 | 4x DisplayPort 1.2 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_0) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan Version | 1.2.175 | 1.2.170 |

| Length | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | 173 mm (6.8 inches) |

| Height | 111 mm (4.4 inches) | 111 mm (4.4 inches) |

| Width | 38 mm (1.5 inches) | Not recorded |

| Release Date | 2013-02-18 | 2014-03-30 |

| Predecessor | GeForce 600 | FirePro Terascale |

| Successor | GeForce 900 | Radeon Pro Polaris |

| Launch MSRP | 999 USD | Not recorded |

| Production Status | End-of-life | End-of-life |