AMD FirePro W5170M vs AMD Radeon RX 550X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear overall winner in the direct comparison between the AMD Radeon RX 550X and the AMD FirePro W5170M. The RX 550X takes both recorded benchmark tests, securing a 2-0 win tally with no wins for the FirePro W5170M.

In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RX 550X scores 9662 points against the FirePro W5170M's 8140 points. That is a delta of 18.7% in favor of the RX 550X. This is not a marginal gap; it places the RX 550X comfortably ahead in compute workloads that use OpenCL. For context, the FirePro W5170M's OpenCL score of 8140 is nearly identical to its average benchmark score of 8595, meaning this test is representative of its typical performance level.

The Vulkan test shows an even larger separation. The RX 550X records 11299 points, while the FirePro W5170M trails at 9050 points. The delta here is 24.9%, a substantial margin that indicates the RX 550X has a significant advantage in modern graphics API workloads. The RX 550X's Vulkan score is also notably higher than its OpenCL score, suggesting the architecture responds well to Vulkan's lower-level abstraction. The FirePro W5170M's Vulkan score is 9050, which is higher than its OpenCL result but still far behind the RX 550X.

Looking at the average benchmark scores, the RX 550X averages 10481 points across its recorded tests. This places it in the 49th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6600S at 10629 points (a 1.4% higher average), the AMD Radeon R9 M275X at 10582 points (1% higher), the NVIDIA Tesla C2075 at 10400 points (0.8% lower), and the AMD Radeon RX 6500M at 10362 points (1.2% lower). The RX 550X sits within a tight cluster of these GPUs, with all deltas under 1.5%. This indicates that while the RX 550X wins decisively against the FirePro W5170M, it is not an outlier in the broader GPU landscape; it is competitive but not dominant against its immediate peers.

The FirePro W5170M, by contrast, averages 8595 points and sits in the 44th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 at 8686 points (1.1% higher), the Intel Arc A380 at 8558 points (0.4% lower), the AMD Radeon HD 8870M at 8462 points (1.6% lower), and the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 at 8458 points (1.6% lower). The FirePro W5170M is thus positioned near the lower-middle tier, roughly on par with these older or entry-level mobile GPUs. The delta between the two cards' average scores is substantial: 10481 versus 8595, a difference of about 22% in favor of the RX 550X.

The head-to-head deltas of 18.7% and 24.9% are consistent with the average score gap, confirming that the RX 550X is the stronger performer across the board, not just in a single workload. The Vulkan advantage is particularly pronounced, which matters for modern gaming and compute applications that increasingly rely on Vulkan.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 550X wins in every recorded benchmark category. There is no test in the database where the FirePro W5170M takes the lead. This makes the use-case split straightforward: for OpenCL compute workloads, the RX 550X is 18.7% faster; for Vulkan workloads, it is 24.9% faster.

For users prioritizing compute performance in OpenCL applications, the RX 550X's 9662-point score provides a clear edge over the FirePro W5170M's 8140 points. The FirePro W5170M, despite its professional branding, cannot match this output. Its 640 shading units are more numerous than the RX 550X's 512, but the RX 550X compensates with higher clocks and a newer architecture generation.

For Vulkan-based workloads, the RX 550X's 11299-point result is the strongest argument in its favor. The 24.9% delta is the largest in the entire comparison, and it suggests that the RX 550X's GCN 4.0 architecture handles Vulkan's explicit command model far more efficiently than the FirePro W5170M's older GCN 1.0 design. The FirePro W5170M's Vulkan support is present, but its score of 9050 reflects a weaker implementation.

In terms of overall percentile placement, the RX 550X at the 49th percentile sits above the FirePro W5170M at the 44th percentile. This is a modest gap in the global ranking, but it translates into a significant performance delta in practice. The RX 550X's average score of 10481 is also closer to its nearest rivals, meaning it competes with a higher tier of GPUs. The FirePro W5170M's 8595 average places it alongside much older or lower-end parts.

For any workload that can leverage Vulkan or OpenCL, the data points to the RX 550X as the superior choice. The FirePro W5170M does not have a single recorded benchmark where it wins, so there is no use case in this dataset where it is the recommended option.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 550X has an average benchmark score of 10481, while the AMD FirePro W5170M averages 8595. This puts the RX 550X in the 49th percentile and the FirePro W5170M in the 44th percentile.

Q: How much faster is the RX 550X in OpenCL performance?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RX 550X scores 9662 versus the FirePro W5170M's 8140, a delta of 18.7% in favor of the RX 550X.

Q: What is the Vulkan performance difference between the two cards?

A: The RX 550X records 11299 points in Geekbench Vulkan, while the FirePro W5170M scores 9050. The RX 550X leads by 24.9%.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD FirePro W5170M has 640 shading units, which is more than the AMD Radeon RX 550X's 512 shading units. Despite this, the RX 550X wins all benchmark tests.

Q: What are the nearest rivals to each GPU?

A: The RX 550X's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6600S (1.4% higher average), AMD Radeon R9 M275X (1% higher), NVIDIA Tesla C2075 (0.8% lower), and AMD Radeon RX 6500M (1.2% lower). The FirePro W5170M's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 (1.1% higher), Intel Arc A380 (0.4% lower), AMD Radeon HD 8870M (1.6% lower), and NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (1.6% lower).

Q: Do both GPUs support DirectX 12?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12. The RX 550X supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the FirePro W5170M supports DirectX 12 (11_1).

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field. The AMD Radeon RX 550X uses the Lexa chip on a 14 nm process node at GlobalFoundries, while the AMD FirePro W5170M uses the Tropo chip on a 28 nm node at TSMC. The RX 550X packs 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 21.4M per mm². The FirePro W5170M contains 1,500 million transistors on a larger 123 mm² die, with a lower density of 12.2M per mm².

Clock speeds favor the RX 550X. It runs at a base clock of 1100 MHz and boosts to 1183 MHz. The FirePro W5170M operates at a 900 MHz base and 925 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ: the RX 550X uses 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective), while the FirePro W5170M uses 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective).

Memory configuration is another clear split. The RX 550X has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro W5170M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on the same 128-bit bus, but only 72.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 550X thus has double the memory capacity and 33% more bandwidth.

Compute unit counts differ. The RX 550X has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The FirePro W5170M has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Despite having more shaders and TMUs, the FirePro W5170M produces lower pixel and texture rates: 14.80 GPixel/s and 37.00 GTexel/s, versus 18.93 GPixel/s and 37.86 GTexel/s for the RX 550X. FP32 performance is close, with the RX 550X at 1,211.4 GFLOPS and the FirePro W5170M at 1,184.0 GFLOPS. The RX 550X also supports FP16 at 1,211.4 GFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the FirePro W5170M has no recorded FP16 capability.

Power and physical specifications differ as well. The RX 550X has a TDP of 50 W and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The FirePro W5170M has no TDP or PSU figure recorded. The RX 550X is a dual-slot card measuring 145 mm (5.7 inches) in length, while the FirePro W5170M is an MXM Module with no recorded dimensions. Both use no power connectors. The bus interface differs: the RX 550X uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the FirePro W5170M uses MXM-A (3.0). Display outputs also diverge, with the RX 550X offering 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the FirePro W5170M is listed as "Portable Device Dependent."

Release dates are far apart. The RX 550X launched on December 15, 2018, while the FirePro W5170M launched on August 24, 2014. Both are end-of-life products.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between the two GPUs is significant and explains much of the performance delta. The AMD Radeon RX 550X is built on GCN 4.0 architecture, part of the Polaris (RX 500X) generation. The AMD FirePro W5170M uses GCN 1.0 architecture from the FirePro Mobile (Wx100M) generation. This is a difference of three full architecture generations, and GCN 4.0 includes substantial improvements over the original GCN design in instruction scheduling, geometry processing, and power efficiency.

The process node difference is stark: 14 nm for the RX 550X versus 28 nm for the FirePro W5170M. This allows the RX 550X to achieve a higher transistor density (21.4M per mm² versus 12.2M per mm²) and higher clock speeds while drawing less power. The RX 550X's 50 W TDP is recorded, while the FirePro W5170M's TDP is not in the database, but the architectural efficiency gains are evident in the benchmark results.

Cache and memory architecture are also generationally different. The RX 550X's GCN 4.0 design includes improved memory compression and a more efficient memory controller, which helps it achieve 96.00 GB/s bandwidth from a 128-bit bus. The FirePro W5170M's older GCN 1.0 architecture lacks these refinements, resulting in 72.00 GB/s from the same bus width.

API support reflects the generational split. The RX 550X supports DirectX 12 (12_0), Vulkan 1.3, and OpenGL 4.6. The FirePro W5170M supports DirectX 12 (11_1), Vulkan 1.2.170, and OpenGL 4.6. The RX 550X's higher DirectX feature level and newer Vulkan version indicate better support for modern rendering techniques and compute workloads.

The shading unit count favors the FirePro W5170M on paper (640 versus 512), but this does not translate into performance wins. The RX 550X's newer architecture executes instructions more efficiently, and its higher clocks (1183 MHz boost versus 925 MHz) compensate for the lower unit count. The result is that the RX 550X achieves higher pixel and texture rates despite fewer TMUs.

The RX 550X also has FP16 support at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, which is useful for machine learning and certain compute tasks. The FirePro W5170M has no recorded FP16 capability, limiting its usefulness in these workloads.

The predecessor and successor relationships differ as well. The RX 550X's predecessor is Polaris and its successor is Vega. The FirePro W5170M's predecessor is FirePro Mobility and its successor is Radeon Pro Mobile. These lineage differences underscore the architectural leap between the two products. The RX 550X represents a mature Polaris design, while the FirePro W5170M is an early GCN implementation from 2014. The recorded data confirms that the newer architecture wins decisively in all measured benchmarks.