AMD FirePro W5170M vs Intel Arc A380 Comparison

The AMD FirePro W5170M and Intel Arc A380 represent two distant generations of GPU design, and the benchmark data reflects a profound performance gulf. The FirePro W5170M, a 2014-era mobile workstation part built on GCN 1.0, is decisively outperformed by the 2022 Arc A380, which uses Intel’s Xe-HPG architecture. With an average benchmark score of 8595 for the AMD part and 8558 for the Intel part, the aggregate numbers are nearly identical, but this masks a dramatic split in individual test results. The data shows that while the FirePro holds a razor-thin edge in overall average, the Arc A380 dominates in modern compute workloads by margins that are impossible to ignore.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only two directly comparable benchmark results are Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, and in both cases the Intel Arc A380 delivers a crushing victory. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Arc A380 scores 38224, while the FirePro W5170M manages only 8140. This represents a 78.7% deficit for the AMD card, meaning the Intel part is approximately 4.7 times faster in raw OpenCL compute throughput. The scale of this difference is not incremental; it is transformative, indicating that the Arc A380 is in a completely different performance class for general-purpose GPU compute tasks.

The Geekbench Vulkan results tell a similar story, with the Arc A380 posting a score of 36736 against the FirePro’s 9050. The delta here is 75.4% in favor of Intel. While the FirePro’s Vulkan score is slightly higher than its OpenCL result, the Arc A380’s Vulkan performance is nearly identical to its OpenCL showing, suggesting that Intel’s driver stack and architecture handle both APIs with equal efficiency. For the FirePro, the gap between its OpenCL and Vulkan scores is modest, but the absolute numbers remain far too low to compete.

The wins column is unambiguous: the Arc A380 secures 2 victories, while the FirePro W5170M secures 0. However, the nearestRivals data provides a crucial counterpoint. The FirePro’s average score of 8595 is actually 0.4% higher than the Arc A380’s average of 8558. This means that despite losing both head-to-head tests by enormous margins, the FirePro’s overall average is buoyed by other benchmark metrics not directly compared here. The Arc A380’s nearest rival list confirms this, showing the FirePro as its closest competitor with a -0.4% delta, while the FirePro’s own list shows the Arc A380 as its nearest rival with a +0.4% delta. This statistical tie in averages, juxtaposed with the massive single-test losses, suggests that the FirePro excels in some legacy or specific workloads where the Arc A380 does not participate in these aggregated scores.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A380 is the clear winner in any modern, API-accelerated compute scenario. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 38224 and Vulkan score of 36736 indicate that it is built for contemporary software that leverages parallel processing, ray tracing, and advanced shading models. With 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, the Arc A380 has a substantial hardware advantage over the FirePro’s 640 shaders, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The presence of 8 dedicated ray tracing cores further cements its position for future-proofed workloads. The data supports that the Arc A380 is the appropriate choice for any application that requires heavy compute, content creation, or DirectX 12 Ultimate features.

The AMD FirePro W5170M, conversely, finds its winning edge only in the aggregate average score, where it edges out the Arc A380 by 0.4%. This is a narrow, almost statistical victory, but it implies that in certain unspecified legacy benchmarks, the FirePro holds its own. Its GCN 1.0 architecture, while ancient, may have optimized paths for older OpenGL or compute workloads that do not translate to modern API scores. The FirePro’s 72.00 GB/s of memory bandwidth is less than half of the Arc A380’s 186.0 GB/s, yet its 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus may be sufficient for older applications that do not require large framebuffers. For a user running legacy workstation software that predates the Arc A380’s driver support, the FirePro could theoretically offer stable, predictable performance, though the benchmark data does not directly quantify this.

In summary, the Arc A380 wins on raw modern performance, while the FirePro’s only claim is a marginal lead in an aggregated score that is not backed by any single benchmark victory in the provided data. The FirePro is a relic of its era, and the Arc A380 is a modern entry-level discrete GPU that outclasses it in every measurable modern test.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the Intel Arc A380 in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The Arc A380 scores 38224, while the AMD FirePro W5170M scores 8140, giving Intel a 78.7% advantage.

Q: Does the AMD FirePro W5170M win any benchmark against the Arc A380?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the Arc A380 winning 2 out of 2 tests, with the FirePro winning 0.

Q: Why are the average benchmark scores so close if the Arc A380 dominates the head-to-head tests?

A: The FirePro’s average score is 8595, while the Arc A380’s is 8558. The 0.4% difference indicates the FirePro performs relatively better in other benchmarks not directly compared in the head-to-head section.

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

A: The FirePro has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 72.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the Arc A380 has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with 186.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor count?

A: The Intel Arc A380 has 7,200 million transistors, compared to the AMD FirePro’s 1,500 million, a 4.8x difference.

Q: Does the Arc A380 support more advanced DirectX features?

A: Yes. The Arc A380 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the FirePro only supports DirectX 12 (11_1).

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every core specification. The Intel Arc A380 is built on a 6 nm process node, while the AMD FirePro W5170M uses a 28 nm node. This process advantage allows the Arc A380 to pack 7,200 million transistors into a 157 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 45.9M / mm², compared to the FirePro’s 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die at 12.2M / mm². The Arc A380’s base clock is 2000 MHz with a boost of 2050 MHz, while the FirePro operates at 900 MHz base and 925 MHz boost. Memory speeds also diverge, with the Arc A380 using 1937 MHz memory (15.5 Gbps effective) and the FirePro using 1125 MHz memory (4.5 Gbps effective).

Shading resources heavily favor Intel: the Arc A380 has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, versus the FirePro’s 640 shaders, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The Arc A380 also includes 8 ray tracing cores, which the FirePro lacks entirely. Pixel and texture rates are significantly higher on the Intel part at 65.60 GPixel/s and 131.2 GTexel/s, respectively, compared to the FirePro’s 14.80 GPixel/s and 37.00 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute output is 4.198 TFLOPS for the Arc A380, while the FirePro manages only 1,184.0 GFLOPS. The Arc A380 also supports FP16 at 8.397 TFLOPS (2:1), a feature absent from the FirePro’s specification.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two cards is generational. The AMD FirePro W5170M is based on GCN 1.0, an architecture that debuted in 2012 and was designed for the then-current DirectX 11 era. Its API support includes DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. In contrast, the Intel Arc A380 uses the Xe-HPG architecture, which is designed for modern gaming and compute workloads, supporting DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Arc A380’s inclusion of 8 ray tracing cores is a fundamental hardware feature that the older GCN design cannot emulate, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing that the FirePro cannot perform.

The production status of both parts is end-of-life, but their release dates are separated by nearly eight years: the FirePro launched on 2014-08-24, while the Arc A380 launched on 2022-06-13. The FirePro has no launch MSRP, while the Arc A380 carries a launch MSRP of 149 USD. The FirePro’s predecessor is FirePro Mobility and its successor is Radeon Pro Mobile, whereas the Arc A380’s predecessor is Xe Graphics and its successor is Battlemage. The FirePro uses an MXM-A (3.0) bus interface and draws power from the slot with no external power connectors, fitting an MXM Module form factor. The Arc A380 is a dual-slot card with a 1x 8-pin power connector, a 250 W suggested PSU, and dimensions of 222 mm x 114 mm x 42 mm. Display outputs also differ, with the FirePro using portable device-dependent outputs, while the Arc A380 offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 2.0. The TDP is listed only for the Arc A380 at 75 W; the FirePro’s TDP is not specified.