AMD FirePro W5130M vs AMD Radeon 610M Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 610M has a higher average benchmark score at 5444, compared to the AMD FirePro W5130M's 4904. This places the Radeon 610M in the 32nd percentile of all GPUs, while the FirePro W5130M sits in the 29th percentile.

Q: How do the two compare in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The FirePro W5130M wins the only head-to-head benchmark available. It scores 4904 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 4535 for the Radeon 610M, a 7.5% advantage for the older FirePro part.

Q: Are these GPUs from the same architecture generation?

A: No. The Radeon 610M uses RDNA 2.0 architecture on a 6 nm process, while the FirePro W5130M is built on GCN 1.0 architecture using a 28 nm process. They also belong to different generations, with the 610M listed under Navi II IGP (Mendocino Mobile) and the FirePro under FirePro Mobile (Wx100M).

Q: What are the release dates for these products?

A: The Radeon 610M was released on September 19, 2022, while the FirePro W5130M launched on October 1, 2015. Both are now listed as end-of-life products.

Q: Which GPU supports more advanced DirectX features?

A: The Radeon 610M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the FirePro W5130M only reaches DirectX 12 (11_1). The Radeon 610M also supports Vulkan 1.4 compared to Vulkan 1.2.170 on the FirePro.

Q: How does the Radeon 610M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The database shows the Radeon 610M is essentially neck-and-neck with nearby competitors. It trails the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 by 0.4%, beats the AMD Radeon R7 M365X by 0.5%, trails the AMD Radeon R7 M440 by 0.7%, and sits 1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two mobile GPUs is substantial, reflecting their very different design philosophies and release periods. The Radeon 610M is built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC with a die size of 100 mm². The FirePro W5130M uses the much older GCN 1.0 architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at the same foundry, with a die size of 123 mm² and a transistor count of 1,500 million. The Radeon 610M has no listed transistor count, but its transistor density of 12.2M per mm² on the FirePro contrasts sharply with the newer process technology.

The RDNA 2.0 part integrates 128 shading units, 8 texture mapping units, and 4 raster output pipelines. The FirePro W5130M packs significantly more compute hardware: 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This fourfold difference in raw shading resources explains why the FirePro can still outperform the newer chip in certain workloads despite its age. The Radeon 610M also includes 2 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the GCN 1.0 architecture.

Memory architecture differs completely. The Radeon 610M uses System Shared memory, meaning its frame buffer is dynamically allocated from system RAM, with bandwidth described as System Dependent. The FirePro W5130M has dedicated 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth. This dedicated memory arrangement gives the FirePro predictable performance characteristics that the shared-memory Radeon cannot guarantee.

Clock speeds tell another story of generational progress. The Radeon 610M runs at a base clock of 1500 MHz with a boost up to 1900 MHz. The FirePro W5130M operates at 900 MHz base and 925 MHz boost, with its memory clocked at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective). The Radeon's much higher core clocks partially compensate for its smaller shader count. The bus interface also differs: the Radeon uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the FirePro uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

API support marks a clear generational divide. The Radeon 610M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The FirePro W5130M supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The RDNA 2.0 part also has a successor listed as Navi III IGP and a predecessor of Vega II IGP, while the FirePro's predecessor is FirePro Mobility and its successor is Radeon Pro Mobile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a single direct benchmark comparison between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. In that test, the AMD FirePro W5130M emerges victorious with a score of 4904 against the Radeon 610M's 4535. This represents a 7.5% advantage for the FirePro, a notable result given that the FirePro launched seven years earlier.

This outcome is somewhat counterintuitive when considering the specifications. The Radeon 610M has significantly higher clock speeds, a modern architecture, and a much smaller process node. However, the FirePro's 512 shading units versus the Radeon's 128 shading units provide a fourfold raw compute advantage that more than compensates for its lower clocks. The FirePro's dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth also eliminates the variability of shared system memory.

The FirePro's victory in OpenCL is consistent with its overall compute-oriented positioning. Its FP32 performance of 947.2 GFLOPS nearly doubles the Radeon 610M's 486.4 GFLOPS. Similarly, the FirePro's texture rate of 29.60 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 14.80 GPixel/s both roughly double the Radeon's 15.20 GTexel/s and 7.600 GPixel/s.

Looking at the broader benchmark picture, the Radeon 610M shows strength in other API-based workloads. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 6353 is not directly comparable to the FirePro, which has no recorded Vulkan benchmark in the database. The Radeon's average benchmark score of 5444, derived from both its OpenCL and Vulkan results, exceeds the FirePro's 4904 average.

The Radeon 610M's nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 (5467 average, 0.4% higher), AMD Radeon R7 M365X (5416, 0.5% lower), AMD Radeon R7 M440 (5483, 0.7% higher), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M (5501, 1% higher). The FirePro W5130M's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB (4901, 0.1% higher), NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 (4893, 0.2% lower), AMD Radeon R7 M265 (4929, 0.5% higher), and AMD Radeon R7 M360 (4931, 0.5% higher).

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field recorded in the database. The Radeon 610M uses a 6 nm process node versus 28 nm for the FirePro W5130M. Die sizes are 100 mm² and 123 mm² respectively, with the FirePro listing 1,500 million transistors and a density of 12.2M per mm², while the Radeon lists neither.

Clock speeds show the Radeon at 1500 MHz base and 1900 MHz boost, versus the FirePro's 900 MHz base and 925 MHz boost. Memory configurations are fundamentally different: the Radeon uses System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth, while the FirePro has 2 GB GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute resources differ significantly: the Radeon has 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, and 4 ROPs, while the FirePro has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The Radeon includes 2 ray tracing cores; the FirePro has none. Pixel rates are 7.600 GPixel/s versus 14.80 GPixel/s. Texture rates are 15.20 GTexel/s versus 29.60 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 486.4 GFLOPS versus 947.2 GFLOPS. The Radeon has a listed FP16 figure of 972.8 GFLOPS (2:1); the FirePro has no FP16 data.

Power characteristics differ as well. The Radeon 610M has a TDP of 15 W and is an IGP with no power connectors. The FirePro W5130M has no TDP listed, no slot width, and no power connector information. The Radeon uses PCIe 4.0 x8, the FirePro uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs are listed as Portable Device Dependent for the Radeon, with no display output data for the FirePro.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro W5130M wins in raw compute throughput. Its 947.2 GFLOPS FP32 performance, 29.60 GTexel/s texture rate, and 14.80 GPixel/s pixel rate all substantially exceed the Radeon 610M's figures. In the only direct head-to-head benchmark, the FirePro leads by 7.5% in Geekbench OpenCL. This makes it the better choice for compute-heavy workloads that leverage OpenCL and can take advantage of its 512 shading units and dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. Its 128-bit memory bus provides consistent, predictable memory performance that shared-memory solutions cannot match.

The AMD Radeon 610M wins in architectural modernity and API feature support. Its RDNA 2.0 architecture supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), a generation ahead of the FirePro's DirectX 12 (11_1). It also offers Vulkan 1.4 support versus 1.2.170, and includes ray tracing cores, a feature the FirePro lacks entirely. Its higher clock speeds (1900 MHz boost versus 925 MHz boost) and smaller 6 nm process node make it dramatically more power-efficient, with a 15 W TDP. The Radeon's average benchmark score of 5444 exceeds the FirePro's 4904, driven largely by its strong Vulkan performance of 6353.

For gaming and modern graphics workloads, the Radeon 610M is the more future-proof option. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate support and ray tracing capabilities align with contemporary software requirements. The FirePro W5130M, despite its compute advantage, is limited by its older API support and lacks the feature set needed for current-generation gaming features.

For professional compute tasks that rely on OpenCL and benefit from dedicated VRAM, the FirePro W5130M remains competitive. Its benchmark performance places it in the 29th percentile of all GPUs, just behind the Radeon's 32nd percentile, but its dedicated memory architecture provides a consistency advantage in professional workloads. The Radeon 610M's shared memory approach makes its performance dependent on system conditions, which can be a drawback in sustained compute scenarios.

The Radeon 610M also wins on connectivity with PCIe 4.0 x8, which offers higher bandwidth per lane than the FirePro's PCIe 3.0 x16. For integrated graphics in portable devices, the Radeon's 15 W TDP and IGP form factor make it far more suitable for thin-and-light laptops. The FirePro's lack of TDP data and its discrete mobile design suggest a different class of device entirely, one with more room for cooling and power delivery.