AMD FirePro W5130M vs AMD Radeon R6 M255DX Comparison

The AMD FirePro W5130M and AMD Radeon R6 M255DX are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions built on the same GCN 1.0 architecture and 28 nm TSMC process, but they target very different segments of the laptop market. The data shows a clear hierarchy, with the FirePro W5130M holding a slim but consistent lead in raw compute performance, while the R6 M255DX operates as a system-dependent hybrid part. Below is a breakdown of their benchmark results, competitive positioning, and architectural differences.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a narrow margin between these two GPUs, but the nature of the comparison is complicated by the fact that they were tested under different benchmark suites. The AMD FirePro W5130M produced a Geekbench OpenCL score of 4904, while the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX posted a Geekbench Vulkan score of 4867. That is a delta of just 37 points, or roughly 0.8%, favoring the FirePro part. However, because these are different tests (OpenCL versus Vulkan), the comparison is not perfectly apples-to-apples. Still, the FirePro’s score is 0.8% higher, which suggests it has a modest edge in general-purpose compute workloads that leverage OpenCL.

When placed against their respective nearest rivals, both GPUs land in a tightly packed cluster of mid-to-low-range hardware. The FirePro W5130M’s average score of 4904 places it within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB (4901) and 0.2% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 (4893). It trails the AMD Radeon R7 M265 (4929) and AMD Radeon R7 M360 (4931) by 0.5% each. This means the FirePro is essentially tied with a modern enthusiast-class card in this specific OpenCL test, which is a surprising result given the massive generational gap in architecture and features. The FirePro’s percentile ranking of 29 versus all GPUs indicates it sits below the median, but its nearest rivals show that within its own performance tier, the spread is razor-thin.

The Radeon R6 M255DX, with its Vulkan score of 4867, is similarly positioned. It is 0.2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M (4855) and 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 940MX (4844). It falls 0.5% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 (4893) and 0.7% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB (4901). Its percentile ranking of 28 is one point lower than the FirePro’s. The key takeaway is that neither GPU is a performance king, but both are competitive within a narrow band of older and entry-level discrete graphics solutions. The FirePro W5130M’s higher raw score and better percentile suggest it is the stronger part, but the difference is small enough that real-world application compatibility and driver optimization could easily reverse the order in specific tasks.

The Verdict

From the data alone, the AMD FirePro W5130M is the better GPU. It delivers a higher benchmark score (4904 versus 4867), a one-point higher percentile ranking (29 versus 28), and a more conventional discrete memory configuration with 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon R6 M255DX, by contrast, relies on system-shared memory, which makes its performance dependent on the host laptop’s RAM speed and architecture. That is a significant handicap in any memory-bandwidth-sensitive workload.

The FirePro W5130M is the pick for anyone who needs a reliable, dedicated mobile GPU with predictable performance for compute tasks like OpenCL acceleration. Its 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs are all higher than the R6 M255DX’s 320 shaders, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The FirePro also runs at higher clocks (900 MHz base, 925 MHz boost versus 780 MHz base, 855 MHz boost) and achieves 947.2 GFLOPS of FP32 performance versus the R6’s 547.2 GFLOPS. That is a 73% advantage in theoretical peak compute, which aligns with the modest benchmark lead.

The Radeon R6 M255DX is not without merit, but its strengths are contextual. As an integrated-class part (labeled IGP) with system-shared memory, it is designed for low-cost, low-power laptops where a discrete GPU is not an option. Its benchmark score of 4867 in Vulkan shows it can hold its own against older discrete parts like the GeForce 940MX, but that result is likely dependent on the host system’s memory configuration. For a user who already owns a laptop with this GPU, the data suggests it is adequate for light gaming and general acceleration, but it is not a part you would choose for serious compute work.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro W5130M wins decisively in raw compute throughput. Its FP32 rate of 947.2 GFLOPS is nearly double the R6 M255DX’s 547.2 GFLOPS. It also leads in pixel fill rate (14.80 GPixel/s versus 6.840 GPixel/s) and texture fill rate (29.60 GTexel/s versus 17.10 GTexel/s). These numbers translate to better performance in tasks that are heavily parallel, such as OpenCL-based physics simulations, video encoding, and image processing. The FirePro’s dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth also gives it a massive advantage in any workload that requires frequent data access, since the R6 must share system memory and its bandwidth is listed as “System Dependent.”

The Radeon R6 M255DX wins in the domain of system integration. It is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with a bus interface of IGP, meaning it is built into the chipset or CPU package. This eliminates the need for a separate memory pool and reduces the physical footprint and power requirements. For a thin-and-light laptop, that is a winning trade-off. The R6’s Vulkan score of 4867 shows it can handle modern graphics APIs, and its 0.5% lead over the NVIDIA GeForce 940MX suggests it is competitive with entry-level discrete parts from the same era. However, its performance ceiling is capped by the host system’s memory, so its wins are more about efficiency and convenience than absolute speed.

In terms of benchmark wins, the FirePro W5130M takes the overall score and the compute-heavy metrics. The R6 M255DX has no direct benchmark win against the FirePro, but it does hold a 0.5% advantage over the GeForce 940MX, which is a rival that the FirePro does not directly face. So, the R6 wins the “low-power integrated” category by default, while the FirePro wins every head-to-head numerical comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro W5130M scores 4904 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX scores 4867 in Geekbench Vulkan. The FirePro leads by 37 points (0.8%).

Q: How do these GPUs compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The FirePro W5130M is within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB (4901) and 0.2% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 (4893) in OpenCL. The R6 M255DX is 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 940MX (4844) and 0.2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M (4855) in Vulkan.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each GPU?

A: The FirePro W5130M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. The R6 M255DX uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth and a bus interface of IGP.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The FirePro W5130M has 512 shading units, compared to the R6 M255DX’s 320 shading units. The FirePro also has 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs versus 20 TMUs and 8 ROPs on the R6.

Q: What is the process node and architecture for both GPUs?

A: Both GPUs are built on the GCN 1.0 architecture using a 28 nm process at TSMC. The FirePro uses the Tropo chip (1,500 million transistors, 123 mm² die), while the R6 uses the Jet chip (690 million transistors, 56 mm² die).

Q: What is the release timeline for these products?

A: The FirePro W5130M was released on 2015-10-01, and the R6 M255DX was released on 2014-01-06. Both are end-of-life products.

Architecture Differences

Despite sharing the same GCN 1.0 architecture and 28 nm TSMC manufacturing process, these two chips are fundamentally different in scale and design philosophy. The AMD FirePro W5130M is built around the Tropo chip, which packs 1,500 million transistors onto a 123 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 12.2 million transistors per mm². The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX uses the much smaller Jet chip, with just 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, yielding a slightly higher transistor density of 12.3 million per mm². The die size difference is stark—the Tropo die is more than twice the size of the Jet die—which reflects the FirePro’s role as a dedicated discrete GPU with more compute resources.

The execution units tell the story. The FirePro W5130M features 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The R6 M255DX is cut down to 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. This directly impacts fill rates: the FirePro delivers 14.80 GPixel/s and 29.60 GTexel/s, while the R6 manages only 6.840 GPixel/s and 17.10 GTexel/s. The clock speeds also favor the FirePro, with a 900 MHz base and 925 MHz boost, versus 780 MHz base and 855 MHz boost on the R6. Peak FP32 performance is 947.2 GFLOPS for the FirePro and 547.2 GFLOPS for the R6, a 73% gap that explains the benchmark differences.

Memory architecture is the biggest differentiator. The FirePro has dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The R6 M255DX has no dedicated VRAM; it uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth and a bus interface of IGP. This makes the R6’s performance heavily reliant on the host laptop’s RAM and memory controller, whereas the FirePro’s performance is consistent regardless of the system. The FirePro also uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the R6 is soldered into the system as an IGP. Both GPUs support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, but the FirePro’s dedicated memory and larger chip give it a clear architectural advantage for sustained compute workloads.