AMD FirePro W5130M vs AMD Radeon R7 M260X Comparison

The AMD Radeon R7 M260X and the AMD FirePro W5130M are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions from AMD built on the same GCN 1.0 architecture and 28 nm TSMC process node, yet they target different segments of the laptop market. The data shows a single direct head-to-head comparison, with the R7 M260X taking a 16% lead in the Geekbench OpenCL test, but the underlying specifications reveal a more nuanced story where the FirePro W5130M holds significant theoretical advantages in raw throughput and memory capacity.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the benchmark data, the AMD Radeon R7 M260X is the clear winner in the only directly comparable test. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 5690 against the FirePro W5130M’s 4904, a decisive 16% advantage. This makes the R7 M260X the better choice for compute workloads that rely on OpenCL acceleration, as its average benchmark score of 5161 also sits above the FirePro’s 4904. The R7 M260X’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M (avg score 5154, delta 0.1%), NVIDIA Quadro 4000M (5211, delta -1%), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M (5236, delta -1.4%), and AMD Radeon R7 240 (5063, delta 1.9%). This positions the R7 M260X in a competitive mid-range tier where it slightly edges out the Quadro K3100M but trails the GeForce GTX 760M by 1.4%.

The AMD FirePro W5130M, despite its lower benchmark scores, wins on paper in several specification-driven scenarios. It carries 2 GB of GDDR5 memory versus the R7 M260X’s 1 GB, making it more suitable for workloads that require larger frame buffers or datasets. Its pixel rate of 14.80 GPixel/s is more than double the R7 M260X’s 5.720 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 29.60 GTexel/s similarly dwarfs the R7 M260X’s 17.16 GTexel/s. For fill-rate-bound tasks or applications that heavily utilize texture sampling, the FirePro W5130M should theoretically deliver substantially higher performance. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB (avg score 4901, delta 0.1%), NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 (4893, delta 0.2%), AMD Radeon R7 M265 (4929, delta -0.5%), and AMD Radeon R7 M360 (4931, delta -0.5%). The FirePro’s average score of 4904 places it in the 29th percentile of all GPUs, just one point below the R7 M260X’s 30th percentile.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the GCN 1.0 architecture and are fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process, but they are built on different chips with distinct configurations. The Radeon R7 M260X uses the Opal chip, which contains 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.3 million per mm². The FirePro W5130M uses the larger Tropo chip, packing 1,500 million transistors onto a 123 mm² die, with a nearly identical transistor density of 12.2 million per mm². This 58% increase in transistor count for the FirePro directly translates into more execution resources: it has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units, versus the R7 M260X’s 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs.

The clock speeds also differ significantly. The FirePro W5130M runs at a base clock of 900 MHz with a boost up to 925 MHz, while the R7 M260X is substantially slower at 620 MHz base and 715 MHz boost. This combination of more cores and higher clocks gives the FirePro a massive theoretical compute advantage: its FP32 throughput is 947.2 GFLOPS, compared to 549.1 GFLOPS for the R7 M260X. Both cards use GDDR5 memory running at 1000 MHz with a 4 Gbps effective data rate and a 128-bit bus, resulting in identical memory bandwidth of 64.00 GB/s. The memory capacity differs, however, with the R7 M260X offering 1024 MB and the FirePro offering 2 GB.

The bus interface also differs, with the R7 M260X using PCIe 3.0 x8 and the FirePro W5130M using the full PCIe 3.0 x16 interface. This gives the FirePro twice the theoretical bandwidth for data transfer between the GPU and the host system, which can matter for workloads that stream large amounts of data. The power connectors are listed as "None" for the R7 M260X, while the FirePro’s power connector field is null, and both lack TDP specifications. The R7 M260X’s display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," while the FirePro’s display outputs are not specified.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the AMD Radeon R7 M260X scores 5690 and the AMD FirePro W5130M scores 4904. The R7 M260X wins by a 16% margin, which is a substantial difference in compute performance. This result is surprising given the FirePro’s higher theoretical FP32 throughput of 947.2 GFLOPS versus 549.1 GFLOPS, but benchmark results indicate that real-world OpenCL performance does not always scale linearly with raw compute specifications. The R7 M260X also demonstrates consistency by scoring 4631 in Geekbench Vulkan, a test that the FirePro W5130M has no recorded result for. The R7 M260X’s average benchmark score of 5161 is 5.2% higher than the FirePro’s 4904, reinforcing its overall compute advantage in the available data.

Looking at the nearest rivals provides additional context. The R7 M260X’s OpenCL score of 5690 puts it 1% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M (avg 5211) and 0.1% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M (avg 5154), but 1.4% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M (avg 5236). The FirePro W5130M’s score of 4904 places it in a different competitive bracket, where it is essentially tied with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB (delta 0.1%) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 (delta 0.2%), while trailing the AMD Radeon R7 M265 by 0.5% and the AMD Radeon R7 M360 by 0.5%. This shows that the FirePro competes with older or lower-tier desktop and mobile parts, whereas the R7 M260X sits in a slightly higher performance class.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every core specification. The R7 M260X uses the Opal chip with 950 million transistors and a 77 mm² die size, while the FirePro W5130M uses the Tropo chip with 1,500 million transistors and a 123 mm² die size. The shading unit count is 384 for the R7 M260X and 512 for the FirePro, a 33% increase. Texture mapping units are 24 versus 32, and raster output units are 8 versus 16, the latter representing a 100% increase for the FirePro. Clock speeds favor the FirePro, with a base of 900 MHz and boost of 925 MHz against the R7 M260X’s 620 MHz base and 715 MHz boost.

Memory capacity is 1024 MB for the R7 M260X and 2 GB for the FirePro, both using GDDR5 with a 128-bit bus and 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. The pixel rate is 5.720 GPixel/s for the R7 M260X and 14.80 GPixel/s for the FirePro, while the texture rate is 17.16 GTexel/s versus 29.60 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 549.1 GFLOPS for the R7 M260X and 947.2 GFLOPS for the FirePro. The bus interface differs, with the R7 M260X using PCIe 3.0 x8 and the FirePro using PCIe 3.0 x16. The R7 M260X has no power connectors listed, while the FirePro’s power connector field is null. Both support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The R7 M260X was released on 2015-12-05, while the FirePro W5130M was released earlier on 2015-10-01.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher benchmark score in OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M260X scores 5690 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 16% higher than the AMD FirePro W5130M’s score of 4904.

Q: Does the FirePro W5130M have more compute units than the R7 M260X?

A: Yes, the FirePro W5130M has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units, compared to the R7 M260X’s 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 raster output units.

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

A: Both cards have identical memory bandwidth of 64.00 GB/s, as they both use GDDR5 memory at 1000 MHz with a 4 Gbps effective rate on a 128-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has a larger memory capacity?

A: The AMD FirePro W5130M has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the AMD Radeon R7 M260X has 1024 MB.

Q: How does the R7 M260X compare to its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M?

A: The R7 M260X has an average benchmark score of 5161, which is 0.1% higher than the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M’s average score of 5154.

Q: What is the transistor count difference between the two AMD GPUs?

A: The FirePro W5130M uses the Tropo chip with 1,500 million transistors, while the R7 M260X uses the Opal chip with 950 million transistors.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split between measured performance and theoretical capability. The AMD Radeon R7 M260X wins the only head-to-head benchmark by 16% in Geekbench OpenCL, and its average benchmark score of 5161 is higher than the FirePro W5130M’s 4904. For users whose primary concern is OpenCL compute performance or Vulkan workloads—where the R7 M260X also has a recorded score of 4631—the R7 M260X is the better choice based on actual test results. Its 30th percentile ranking among all GPUs, versus the FirePro’s 29th, further supports this conclusion.

However, the AMD FirePro W5130M is not without merit. Its specification sheet shows a GPU that should, in theory, outperform the R7 M260X in many scenarios. With nearly double the FP32 throughput (947.2 GFLOPS vs 549.1 GFLOPS), more than double the pixel rate (14.80 GPixel/s vs 5.720 GPixel/s), and a 2 GB frame buffer, the FirePro is better suited for graphics-intensive tasks such as high-resolution rendering or applications that require large texture sets. The PCIe 3.0 x16 interface also provides greater host bandwidth compared to the R7 M260X’s PCIe 3.0 x8. The fact that the FirePro does not translate these advantages into higher benchmark scores suggests either driver limitations or architectural inefficiencies in the specific OpenCL test. Users who rely on the listed theoretical specifications and need the extra memory and fill rate should consider the FirePro W5130M, while those who prioritize measured compute performance should choose the Radeon R7 M260X.