AMD FirePro W5170M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 Comparison

The Verdict

The data presents a straightforward, if narrow, victory for the AMD FirePro W5170M. In the only head-to-head benchmark available, the FirePro W5170M scores 8140 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 scores 7925. That is a 2.7% delta, placing the AMD part ahead. The FirePro also holds a higher overall percentile rank at 44, versus the GTX 460's 41. For a user choosing strictly between these two, the FirePro W5170M is the more capable GPU in raw compute throughput, but the margin is thin.

However, the context of each card matters greatly. The FirePro W5170M is a mobile workstation part from 2014, while the GTX 460 is a desktop gaming card from 2010. The GeForce GTX 460 has a launch MSRP of 199 USD. The FirePro, being a mobile MXM module, has no comparable price point. The data suggests the FirePro is the safer pick for modern compute tasks, as it supports Vulkan 1.2.170, whereas the GTX 460 has no Vulkan support listed. The GTX 460, despite its age, retains a higher memory bandwidth of 86.40 GB/s, which could favor certain bandwidth-bound workloads. Yet, in the one metric that directly compares them, the FirePro wins.

For a buyer today, the FirePro W5170M is the better choice if software compatibility and raw OpenCL performance are the priorities. The GTX 460 might be relevant only for legacy system builds where its PCIe 2.0 x16 interface and specific display outputs (2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI) are needed. But the benchmark data does not favor it.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two is wide. The AMD FirePro W5170M is built on GCN 1.0 architecture, using the Tropo chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.2M / mm². In contrast, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 uses the Fermi architecture with the GF104 chip, on a much older 40 nm process, also at TSMC. It packs 1,950 million transistors on a substantially larger 332 mm² die, with a lower density of 5.9M / mm².

These process differences explain the efficiency gap. The FirePro's 28 nm node allows for more transistors per area and, presumably, better power efficiency, though the TDP is not listed for the AMD card. The GTX 460, however, has a listed TDP of 160 W and requires a 450 W power supply, plus two 6-pin power connectors. The FirePro is a slot-powered MXM Module with no power connectors, indicating a much lower power draw, though that exact figure is absent from the data.

The compute configurations also differ sharply. The FirePro W5170M has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The GTX 460 has 336 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. Despite fewer shaders, the GTX 460 has more texture units and ROPs, which explains its higher texture rate of 37.80 GTexel/s versus the FirePro's 37.00 GTexel/s. However, the FirePro's pixel rate is much higher at 14.80 GPixel/s, versus the GTX 460's 9.450 GPixel/s. The FirePro also leads in FP32 performance with 1,184.0 GFLOPS, against the GTX 460's 907.2 GFLOPS.

API support is another major divergence. The FirePro supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The GTX 460 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but Vulkan is null. This means the FirePro is future-proofed for modern Linux and Windows compute stacks, while the GTX 460 is stuck with older APIs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only one benchmark directly compares these two: Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD FirePro W5170M scores 8140, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 scores 7925. The FirePro wins by 2.7%. This is a modest margin, but it is consistent with the average benchmark scores. The FirePro's average across all tests is 8595, while the GTX 460's average is 7925. The FirePro also has a second benchmark result, Geekbench Vulkan, where it scores 9050, but the GTX 460 has no corresponding Vulkan score.

The closest rival data provides further context. The FirePro's nearest rival is the Intel Arc A380, with an average score of 8558, just 0.4% behind. It also edges out the AMD Radeon HD 8870M (8462, +1.6%) and the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (8458, +1.6%). The FirePro is only behind the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 (8686, -1.1%). For the GTX 460, its nearest rival is the NVIDIA Quadro K4100M (7906, +0.2%), meaning the GTX 460 is essentially tied with that card. It trails the NVIDIA Quadro P5000 (8039, -1.4%), the GeForce GTX 880M (8040, -1.4%), and the GeForce GTX 650 Ti (8053, -1.6%).

The data implies that the GTX 460's single benchmark score is its ceiling, while the FirePro has demonstrated higher performance in a second test. The 2.7% delta in the head-to-head is small, but the FirePro's additional Vulkan capability suggests it can handle a broader range of workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD FirePro W5170M, with 1,184.0 GFLOPS, versus the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460's 907.2 GFLOPS.

Q: Does the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 support Vulkan?

A: No. The GTX 460's Vulkan API field is null, while the FirePro W5170M supports Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460, with 86.40 GB/s, compared to the AMD FirePro W5170M's 72.00 GB/s.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two?

A: The FirePro W5170M uses a 28 nm process, while the GTX 460 uses a 40 nm process. Both are fabricated by TSMC.

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro W5170M, with an average score of 8595, versus the GTX 460's 7925.

Q: How does the GTX 460 compare to its nearest rival, the Quadro K4100M?

A: The GTX 460 scores 7925, while the Quadro K4100M scores 7906, giving the GTX 460 a 0.2% edge.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro W5170M wins on pure compute and modern API support. Its FP32 performance of 1,184.0 GFLOPS is 30.5% higher than the GTX 460's 907.2 GFLOPS. Its pixel rate of 14.80 GPixel/s is 56.6% higher. It also wins the only head-to-head benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, by 2.7%. Furthermore, its Vulkan 1.2.170 support means it can run modern compute and graphics workloads that the GTX 460 cannot. The FirePro's smaller die (123 mm² vs 332 mm²) and lack of power connectors suggest it is far more efficient, making it the obvious choice for mobile or low-power systems.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 wins in a few specific, narrow categories. It has higher memory bandwidth at 86.40 GB/s, which is 20% higher than the FirePro's 72.00 GB/s. It also has more TMUs (56 vs 40) and ROPs (24 vs 16), leading to a slightly higher texture rate of 37.80 GTexel/s versus 37.00 GTexel/s. Its 192-bit memory bus is wider than the FirePro's 128-bit bus, though the FirePro compensates with faster effective memory speed (4.5 Gbps vs 3.6 Gbps). The GTX 460 also has a longer physical footprint as a dual-slot card with a 210 mm length, which might be a plus for desktop users needing a large, actively cooled card.

For use cases, the FirePro is the clear winner for general-purpose GPU compute, OpenCL workloads, and any task requiring Vulkan. The GTX 460 might still be relevant for legacy DirectX 11 games or applications that benefit from higher fill rates and memory bandwidth, but its lack of modern API support severely limits its lifespan.

Specification Differences

The table below highlights only the fields where the two GPUs differ:

| Specification | AMD FirePro W5170M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Fermi |

| Chip | Tropo | GF104 |

| Generation | FirePro Mobile (Wx100M) | GeForce 400 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 40 nm |

| Transistors | 1,500 million | 1,950 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 332 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.2M / mm² | 5.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 900 MHz | N/A |

| Boost Clock | 925 MHz | N/A |

| Memory Clock | 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) | 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 768 MB |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 72.00 GB/s | 86.40 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 640 | 336 |

| TMUs | 40 | 56 |

| ROPs | 16 | 24 |

| Pixel Rate | 14.80 GPixel/s | 9.450 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 37.00 GTexel/s | 37.80 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,184.0 GFLOPS | 907.2 GFLOPS |

| TDP | N/A | 160 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 2x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | N/A | 450 W |

| Bus Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a |

| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | N/A |

| Length | N/A | 210 mm (8.3 inches) |

| Release Date | 2014-08-24 | 2010-07-11 |

| Predecessor | FirePro Mobility | GeForce 200 |

| Successor | Radeon Pro Mobile | GeForce 500 |

| Launch MSRP | N/A | 199 USD |

| Geekbench OpenCL Score | 8140 | 7925 |

| Geekbench Vulkan Score | 9050 | N/A |

| Avg Benchmark Score | 8595 | 7925 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 44 | 41 |