AMD FirePro W5130M vs AMD Radeon R5 M330 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only common benchmark recorded for both GPUs is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is decisive. The AMD FirePro W5130M scores 4904, while the AMD Radeon R5 M330 scores 4302. That is a 14% difference in favor of the FirePro. This is not a marginal edge; it places the W5130M a full tier above the R5 M330 in raw compute throughput, which matters for OpenCL workloads like video encoding, physics simulations, and GPU-accelerated filters.

To put that 14% lead into context, the W5130M’s nearest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB (4901, only 0.1% behind) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 (4893, 0.2% behind). The W5130M essentially matches those cards in OpenCL, despite being an older mobile workstation part. On the other side, the R5 M330’s closest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M (4151, 0.4% behind) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (4193, 0.5% ahead). The R5 M330’s 4302 score sits in a much lower performance neighborhood.

The database also records a Vulkan score for the R5 M330 (4037), but no corresponding Vulkan result exists for the W5130M, so no direct comparison can be made there. What the data does show is that in the one shared test, the W5130M wins outright, and the gap is large enough that it would likely dominate most compute-bound tasks.

Interestingly, the W5130M’s percentile rank among all GPUs is 29, while the R5 M330 sits at 25. That four-point gap in percentiles aligns with the 14% benchmark delta: the W5130M is not just faster, it is meaningfully higher in the overall distribution of GPU performance.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL score?

A: The AMD FirePro W5130M scores 4904, which is 14% higher than the AMD Radeon R5 M330’s 4302.

Q: Does the R5 M330 have any benchmark where it beats the W5130M?

A: No. In the only shared test (Geekbench OpenCL), the W5130M wins. The R5 M330 has a Vulkan score (4037) that is not recorded for the W5130M, so no comparison is possible there.

Q: How close is the W5130M to its nearest rival, the RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB?

A: The W5130M’s score of 4904 is 0.1% higher than the RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB’s 4901. They are effectively tied in OpenCL performance.

Q: What is the R5 M330’s closest competitor in the database?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K2100M scores 4151, which is 0.4% lower than the R5 M330’s 4302. The R5 M330 also sits 0.5% below the GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (4193).

Q: Does the W5130M’s higher transistor count translate to a higher benchmark score?

A: The W5130M has 1,500 million transistors versus 690 million on the R5 M330, and its OpenCL score is 14% higher. The data suggests that the larger chip does deliver more compute performance, though clock speeds and memory bandwidth also play a role.

Q: Which GPU has a better percentile rank?

A: The W5130M ranks at the 29th percentile of all GPUs, while the R5 M330 ranks at the 25th. The W5130M is higher in the overall performance distribution.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on the same GCN 1.0 architecture and use a 28 nm TSMC process, but the underlying chips are very different in scale. The W5130M uses the Tropo chip, which packs 1,500 million transistors into a 123 mm² die. The R5 M330 uses the Exo chip, with only 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die. Transistor density is nearly identical (12.2M per mm² versus 12.3M per mm²), so the W5130M’s advantage comes from sheer physical size, not density improvements.

The compute configuration diverges sharply. The W5130M has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The R5 M330 has only 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. That is a 60% advantage in shading units for the W5130M, which explains much of the 14% OpenCL gap, though the gap is smaller than the raw unit count would suggest due to the R5 M330’s higher clocks.

Clock speeds favor the smaller chip. The R5 M330 runs at a base of 955 MHz and boosts to 1030 MHz, while the W5130M is slower at 900 MHz base and 925 MHz boost. Despite the clock disadvantage, the W5130M achieves higher pixel rate (14.80 GPixel/s versus 8.240 GPixel/s), higher texture rate (29.60 GTexel/s versus 20.60 GTexel/s), and higher FP32 throughput (947.2 GFLOPS versus 659.2 GFLOPS). The W5130M’s wider execution units more than compensate for its lower frequency.

Memory is another major divergence. The W5130M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The R5 M330 uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, with only 14.40 GB/s. That is a 4.4x bandwidth advantage for the W5130M. Memory type and bus width are the most important architectural differences for bandwidth-sensitive workloads.

Both GPUs support PCIe 3.0, but the W5130M uses x16 while the R5 M330 uses x8. The R5 M330 is marked as an integrated graphics part (IGP) with no power connectors and a TDP of 18 W, while the W5130M’s TDP is not recorded. The R5 M330’s display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent", while the W5130M’s outputs are not specified. Both support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD FirePro W5130M is the faster GPU in every measurable shared dimension. Its 14% OpenCL lead, combined with 4.4x the memory bandwidth, 60% more shading units, and higher pixel and texture rates, makes it the clear choice for compute-heavy tasks. The R5 M330’s only advantages are its higher clock speeds and lower 18 W TDP, but those do not translate into better benchmark results.

The W5130M’s percentile rank (29) places it above the R5 M330 (25), and its nearest rivals include cards like the RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB, which the W5130M matches within 0.1%. That is remarkable for a mobile workstation part from 2015. The R5 M330, by contrast, sits among entry-level mobile GPUs, with its closest rival being the Quadro K2100M.

For users who need OpenCL compute, the W5130M is the only rational choice. For users who prioritize low power consumption and integrated simplicity, the R5 M330’s 18 W TDP and IGP form factor are worth noting, but they come at a severe performance cost. The verdict from the database is that the W5130M is superior in performance, while the R5 M330 is a power-efficient but much weaker alternative.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD FirePro W5130M | AMD Radeon R5 M330 |

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

| Chip | Tropo | Exo |

| Transistors | 1,500 million | 690 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 56 mm² |

| Base Clock | 900 MHz | 955 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 925 MHz | 1030 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) | 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 64.00 GB/s | 14.40 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 512 | 320 |

| TMUs | 32 | 20 |

| ROPs | 16 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 14.80 GPixel/s | 8.240 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 29.60 GTexel/s | 20.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 947.2 GFLOPS | 659.2 GFLOPS |

| TDP | Not recorded | 18 W |

| Slot Width | Not recorded | IGP |

| Power Connectors | Not recorded | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | Not recorded | Portable Device Dependent |

| Release Date | 2015-10-01 | 2015-05-04 |

| Predecessor | FirePro Mobility | Solar System |

| Successor | Radeon Pro Mobile | Polaris Mobile |

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro W5130M wins in every recorded benchmark and in nearly every architectural metric. It is the stronger choice for OpenCL workloads, as shown by its 4904 score versus 4302. Its 64.00 GB/s memory bandwidth is critical for large data sets, and its 512 shading units provide substantial parallel throughput. The W5130M’s 14.80 GPixel/s pixel rate and 29.60 GTexel/s texture rate also make it better suited for rendering tasks, even though this is not a gaming-focused part. Its PCIe 3.0 x16 interface provides more host bandwidth than the R5 M330’s x8 link.

The AMD Radeon R5 M330 wins only in power efficiency and clock speed. Its 18 W TDP is the only recorded power figure in this comparison, and it is clearly an integrated-class part. The 1030 MHz boost clock is higher than the W5130M’s 925 MHz, but that does not overcome the massive gap in execution resources and memory bandwidth. The R5 M330 also has a Vulkan score (4037) that the W5130M lacks, which means it can at least claim Vulkan support in the database, though without a W5130M Vulkan result, no winner can be declared there.

For users who absolutely need the lowest power draw and are willing to accept a 25th percentile GPU, the R5 M330 has a role. For anyone who needs compute performance, the W5130M is the definitive winner in this head-to-head. The data does not support any scenario where the R5 M330 comes out ahead in raw performance.