AMD FirePro W5170M vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 and AMD FirePro W5170M are both end-of-life professional graphics solutions, but they belong to vastly different eras and market segments. Benchmark data shows the WX 5100 as a dominant performer, winning both shared tests decisively, while the W5170M operates in a lower performance class entirely. The average benchmark scores place the WX 5100 at 8863 and the W5170M at 8595, a modest 3.1% gap, yet the head-to-head results reveal a far larger chasm in raw compute and graphics capability. This analysis breaks down where each card stands based strictly on the observed data.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear hierarchy: the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 is the superior workstation part for virtually any compute-intensive task. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 24217 is 197.5% higher than the FirePro W5170M’s 8140, and its Vulkan result of 26909 is 197.3% above the rival’s 9050. For professionals running OpenCL or Vulkan workloads, the WX 5100 offers roughly triple the performance, making it the only sensible choice when both are available.

The FirePro W5170M, however, is not without purpose. Its niche is mobile integration, as indicated by its MXM Module slot width and portable-device-dependent display outputs. The data shows it holds its own against its own nearest rivals, sitting just 1.6% above the AMD Radeon HD 8870M and 1.6% above the NVIDIA GeForce MX330, while trailing the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 by only 1.1%. For a legacy mobile workstation requiring a specific MXM-A form factor, the W5170M remains a functional option, but its 2 GB memory and 72 GB/s bandwidth severely limit modern workloads.

Choose the WX 5100 if you need desktop-class compute, 8 GB of VRAM, or any of the three benchmark categories tested. Choose the W5170M only if you have a specific MXM-A laptop requirement where the WX 5100’s single-slot PCIe form factor cannot fit. The percentile ranking of 44th for both cards indicates they sit in the same general performance tier among all GPUs, but the head-to-head data shows the WX 5100 is the clear winner in every measurable category.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational. The Radeon Pro WX 5100 uses the Ellesmere chip built on GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. This newer design packs 5,700 million transistors into a 232 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 24.6 million per square millimeter. In contrast, the FirePro W5170M relies on the older Tropo chip with GCN 1.0 architecture, produced on TSMC’s 28 nm process. That chip contains only 1,500 million transistors across a 123 mm² die, yielding a density of 12.2 million per square millimeter.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The WX 5100 offers 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The W5170M is limited to 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, producing just 72.00 GB/s. This 2.2x bandwidth advantage for the WX 5100 directly impacts compute-heavy workloads. Clock speeds tell a different story, with the W5170M running at a higher base clock of 900 MHz versus the WX 5100’s 713 MHz, though the WX 5100 boosts higher at 1086 MHz versus 925 MHz.

The compute resources are heavily skewed toward the newer card. The WX 5100 features 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, while the W5170M has only 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This results in a massive throughput difference: the WX 5100 delivers 3.892 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 121.6 GTexel/s of texture rate, compared to just 1,184.0 GFLOPS and 37.00 GTexel/s for the W5170M. Pixel rates follow suit at 34.75 GPixel/s versus 14.80 GPixel/s.

Feature support also differs. The WX 5100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, while the W5170M lists DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The WX 5100 also provides four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, whereas the W5170M’s outputs are portable-device dependent. The WX 5100 is a single-slot, 173 mm long card requiring no power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU, while the W5170M is an MXM Module with no length specified.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the available benchmark data, the Radeon Pro WX 5100 wins in every shared test category, leaving the FirePro W5170M without a single head-to-head victory. In Geekbench OpenCL, the WX 5100 scores 24217 against 8140, a 197.5% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 26909 against 9050, a 197.3% margin. These are not marginal wins; they represent a tripling of performance in both compute APIs.

The WX 5100’s broader benchmark coverage also gives it a more complete profile. It has been tested across PassMark DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12, plus G2D, G3D, and GPU compute, with scores ranging from 26 in DirectX 12 to 88 in DirectX 9, and a G3D score of 5496. The W5170M has only two recorded benchmarks, both in Geekbench, meaning its performance in DirectX and traditional graphics workloads is entirely undocumented in this data.

Where the W5170M might claim a practical edge is in its form factor and power profile. Its MXM-A (3.0) bus interface and lack of a specified TDP suggest a low-power mobile design, whereas the WX 5100 draws 75 W and requires a PCIe 3.0 x16 slot. For a laptop chassis, the W5170M is the only option that fits. Additionally, the W5170M’s base clock of 900 MHz is higher than the WX 5100’s 713 MHz, though the boost clock reverses this advantage.

In terms of competitive standing, the WX 5100’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R9 M265X (0.1% higher average score), AMD Radeon 550X (0.6% lower), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile (1.3% lower). The W5170M’s rivals include the Intel Arc A380 (0.4% higher), NVIDIA Quadro P2200 (1.1% higher), and NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (1.6% lower). Both cards sit in the 44th percentile of all GPUs, suggesting they are mid-pack performers despite their architectural differences.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 offers 160.0 GB/s, which is more than double the FirePro W5170M’s 72.00 GB/s, thanks to its 256-bit bus versus the W5170M’s 128-bit bus.

Q: What is the performance difference in OpenCL?

A: The WX 5100 scores 24217 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 197.5% higher than the W5170M’s 8140, making it roughly three times faster in this test.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No, both are end-of-life. The WX 5100 was released on November 17, 2016, while the W5170M was released earlier on August 24, 2014.

Q: Which card supports newer DirectX features?

A: The WX 5100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), whereas the W5170M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1), indicating a lower feature level in the older mobile card.

Q: How much VRAM does each card have?

A: The WX 5100 has 8 GB of GDDR5, while the W5170M has only 2 GB of GDDR5, a 4x difference that impacts large dataset handling.

Q: What is the transistor count difference?

A: The WX 5100 contains 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, while the W5170M has 1,500 million on a 123 mm² die, reflecting the newer 14 nm process versus 28 nm.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only two benchmarks where both cards were tested are Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, and the WX 5100 dominates both with nearly identical margins. In Geekbench OpenCL, the WX 5100’s score of 24217 eclipses the W5170M’s 8140 by 197.5%. This means for every unit of OpenCL performance the W5170M delivers, the WX 5100 delivers nearly three. The absolute difference of 16077 points is substantial, reflecting the architectural leap from GCN 1.0 on 28 nm to GCN 4.0 on 14 nm.

The Geekbench Vulkan test shows a similar story. The WX 5100 scores 26909, beating the W5170M’s 9050 by 197.3%. The delta of 17859 points is the largest margin in either test. Vulkan support also differs, with the WX 5100 supporting Vulkan 1.3 versus the W5170M’s 1.2.170, which may contribute to the performance gap alongside the raw compute resource advantage.

Beyond these shared tests, the WX 5100 has a full suite of PassMark results that the W5170M lacks entirely. The WX 5100 scores 88 in DirectX 9, 36 in DirectX 11, 29 in DirectX 10, and 26 in DirectX 12, alongside a G2D score of 777, a G3D score of 5496, and a GPU compute score of 2053. These numbers suggest the WX 5100 is a capable general-purpose workstation card, but the absence of comparable W5170M data means no direct comparison is possible for these APIs.

The average benchmark score differential is small—8863 for the WX 5100 versus 8595 for the W5170M—which might mislead readers into thinking the cards are closely matched. The head-to-head data corrects this impression: the WX 5100 wins 2-0 with margins near 200%. The W5170M’s average is buoyed by its two Geekbench scores, which are far lower than the WX 5100’s, while the WX 5100’s average includes lower PassMark scores that drag it down. When comparing like-for-like, the WX 5100 is unequivocally the stronger card in every measurable way.