AMD FirePro W5170M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 Comparison

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 and AMD FirePro W5170M are both end-of-life graphics cards from the 28nm TSMC process era, but they target entirely different segments: the GTX 960 is a desktop gaming card from the GeForce 900 generation, while the FirePro W5170M is a mobile workstation part built on GCN 1.0. The benchmark data shows a clear overall winner in the GTX 960, which holds a 2-0 win record in head-to-head tests and a higher average benchmark score of 9273 versus 8595, but the FirePro still has specific traits that matter for certain use cases.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 960 wins on raw compute and modern API performance. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 18925 against the FirePro's 8140 — a 132.5% advantage that makes it more than twice as fast in this compute workload. This is the largest single gap between the two cards and reflects the GTX 960's higher shading unit count (1024 vs 640), faster clocks (1127 MHz base vs 900 MHz), and nearly double the texture fill rate (75.39 GTexel/s vs 37.00 GTexel/s). For any OpenCL-accelerated task, from rendering to physics simulation, the GTX 960 is the clear choice.

The GTX 960 also wins the Vulkan test, but by a much narrower margin: 9231 versus 9050, a 2% difference. This suggests that in modern low-level APIs, the cards are closer than the OpenCL results imply, likely because the FirePro's GCN architecture handles Vulkan relatively efficiently despite its older design. Still, a win is a win, and the GTX 960 takes it.

The FirePro W5170M has no benchmark wins in the provided data. However, its niche is not raw speed but form factor and power delivery. As an MXM module with no power connectors, it is designed for portable workstation laptops where the GTX 960's desktop dual-slot, 241mm length and 1x 6-pin connector would never fit. The FirePro's display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent," meaning it adapts to whatever laptop chassis it is installed in, whereas the GTX 960 requires DVI, HDMI 2.0, or DisplayPort 1.2 connections. If you need a GPU for a mobile workstation and cannot use a desktop card, the FirePro is the only one of the two that physically works.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different design philosophies. The GTX 960 uses the GM206 chip with Maxwell 2.0 architecture, built on 28nm at TSMC with 2,940 million transistors on a 228 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.9M per mm². The FirePro W5170M uses the Tropo chip with GCN 1.0 architecture, also 28nm TSMC but with just 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, a density of 12.2M per mm². The GTX 960 has nearly twice the transistors and a larger die, which explains its higher compute throughput.

Memory configurations are similar in capacity and bus width — both have 2 GB GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus — but the GTX 960 runs its memory at 1753 MHz (7 Gbps effective) yielding 112.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the FirePro runs at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) for 72.00 GB/s. That is a 56% bandwidth advantage for the GTX 960. The GTX 960 also has more execution resources: 64 TMUs versus 40, and 32 ROPs versus 16. Pixel rate is 37.70 GPixel/s versus 14.80 GPixel/s, a 2.5x difference.

API support differs slightly. The GTX 960 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The FirePro supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The GTX 960's higher DirectX feature level and newer Vulkan version give it better forward compatibility with modern games and applications. The FirePro's GCN 1.0 is an older architecture that lacks some of the feature set refinements of Maxwell 2.0.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 is the faster card in every measured benchmark. It wins both head-to-head tests, holds a higher average benchmark score (9273 vs 8595), and sits at the 45th percentile versus all GPUs compared to the FirePro's 44th percentile. The GTX 960's nearest rivals — GTX 465, GTX 850M, Radeon R7 M380, and Radeon Vega 8 — all score within 0.6% of it, showing it sits in a competitive mid-range bracket. The FirePro's rivals (Arc A380, Quadro P2200, HD 8870M, MX330) are similarly close, but at a lower absolute level.

Pick the GTX 960 if you need performance for OpenCL compute, Vulkan gaming, or any workload that benefits from higher memory bandwidth and double the texture and pixel throughput. It is also the only one with a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score (162), indicating it can run modern DirectX 12 titles at basic settings. The FirePro W5170M is only the right choice if you specifically need an MXM module for a laptop with no external power connectors — a niche the GTX 960 cannot fill. For any desktop or external-GPU scenario, the GTX 960 is the superior part by every metric in this data.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 scores 9273 on average, while the AMD FirePro W5170M scores 8595, a difference of about 7.9% in favor of the GTX 960.

Q: How much faster is the GTX 960 in OpenCL?

A: The GTX 960 scores 18925 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 8140 for the FirePro, making it 132.5% faster — more than double the performance.

Q: Is the Vulkan performance gap large?

A: No. The GTX 960 scores 9231 and the FirePro scores 9050, a 2% difference. Both cards are close in Vulkan, though the GTX 960 still wins.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The GTX 960 has 112.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the FirePro has 72.00 GB/s. Both use 2 GB GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, but the GTX 960's memory runs at 7 Gbps effective versus 4.5 Gbps.

Q: Can the FirePro W5170M be used in a desktop?

A: The FirePro is an MXM module with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs, so it is designed for laptops. The GTX 960 is a dual-slot desktop card with DVI, HDMI 2.0, and DisplayPort outputs.

Q: Which card has newer API support?

A: The GTX 960 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the FirePro supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. The GTX 960 also has a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 162, which the FirePro lacks.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive result is in Geekbench OpenCL. The GTX 960's 18925 score crushes the FirePro's 8140, a 132.5% delta that highlights the massive gap in raw compute throughput. This comes from the GTX 960's 2.413 TFLOPS FP32 performance versus the FirePro's 1,184 GFLOPS — the GTX 960 is effectively twice as capable in floating-point math. If your workload is OpenCL-heavy, this is not a close contest.

The Vulkan benchmark is far tighter. The GTX 960 posts 9231 versus 9050 for the FirePro, a 2% margin that could come down to driver optimization or clock behavior. Here, the FirePro's GCN architecture shows its age less, and the 2% difference is within the noise of typical benchmark variance. Still, the GTX 960 wins, extending its head-to-head record to 2-0.

Beyond the direct comparisons, the GTX 960 also has a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 162, which the FirePro does not have in its benchmark suite. This gives the GTX 960 a checkmark for modern DirectX 12 gaming that the FirePro cannot match. The GTX 960's Geekbench Metal score of 8773 is also present, though the FirePro has no Metal result to compare.

The GTX 960's nearest rival, the GTX 465, scores 9294, just 0.2% higher — meaning the GTX 960 is effectively at parity with a previous-generation high-end card. The FirePro's closest competitor, the Quadro P2200, scores 8686, which is 1.1% higher than the FirePro's 8595. These percentile positions (45th vs 44th) confirm that while both cards are mid-pack, the GTX 960 sits at the top of its peer group while the FirePro sits slightly below its own.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every hardware specification. The GTX 960 uses the GM206 chip with Maxwell 2.0 architecture, while the FirePro uses the Tropo chip with GCN 1.0. The GTX 960 has 2,940 million transistors on a 228 mm² die; the FirePro has 1,500 million on 123 mm². Transistor density is similar (12.9M vs 12.2M per mm²), but the GTX 960's larger chip delivers more execution units.

Clock speeds favor the GTX 960: 1127 MHz base and 1178 MHz boost versus 900 MHz base and 925 MHz boost for the FirePro. Memory clocks also differ, with the GTX 960 at 1753 MHz (7 Gbps effective) and the FirePro at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective). Both have 2 GB GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, but bandwidth is 112.2 GB/s versus 72.00 GB/s.

Shading units are 1024 on the GTX 960 versus 640 on the FirePro. TMUs are 64 versus 40, and ROPs are 32 versus 16. Pixel rate is 37.70 GPixel/s versus 14.80 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 75.39 GTexel/s versus 37.00 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 2.413 TFLOPS versus 1,184 GFLOPS.

Form factor is a major split: the GTX 960 is a dual-slot desktop card measuring 241 mm (9.5 inches) with a 1x 6-pin power connector and a 300 W suggested PSU. The FirePro is an MXM module with no power connectors and no listed dimensions. Display outputs are 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.2 on the GTX 960, versus "Portable Device Dependent" on the FirePro. API support favors the GTX 960 with DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the FirePro has DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both are end-of-life, but the GTX 960 has a listed launch MSRP of 199 USD.