AMD FirePro W5170M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 Comparison

The database records an unusual pairing: a mobile workstation GPU and a desktop gaming card released within weeks of each other in 2014. Both the AMD FirePro W5170M and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 are now end-of-life, but the recorded data still tells a striking story about how differently these two products were built and how they perform today. On the two shared benchmark tests in the database, the GTX 970 wins both, and by margins large enough to raise the question of whether this is a comparison at all. The answer, as usual, is more nuanced than the raw scores suggest, because the two chips were designed for entirely different thermal and physical envelopes.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct overlap between the two products in the database consists of exactly two tests, and both are decisive. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 970 scores 29,982 against 8,140 for the FirePro W5170M, a gap of 72.9 percent in NVIDIA's favor. Geekbench Vulkan narrows the margin but does not change the outcome: 20,005 versus 9,050, with the GTX 970 ahead by 54.8 percent. There is no benchmark in the recorded data where the FirePro wins, and the head-to-head tally stands at two wins for NVIDIA and zero for AMD.

What does a gap of that size actually mean? Consider each card's peer group. The FirePro W5170M's average benchmark score of 8,595 places it within a percentage point or two of the Intel Arc A380 (8,558 average, a 0.4 percent delta), the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 (8,686, a -1.1 percent delta), the AMD Radeon HD 8870M (8,462, 1.6 percent), and the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (8,458, 1.6 percent). In other words, the mobile FirePro performs like a modest modern entry-level desktop card or a thin-and-light discrete laptop GPU. The GTX 970's average of 7,157 sits nearest the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 (7,170), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE (7,171), the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile (7,203), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 (7,222). That average is dragged down by the many legacy PassMark DirectX tests the FirePro simply does not have entries for, so the average-score comparison flatters the FirePro relative to the head-to-head results. When the same test runs on both chips, the desktop Maxwell part is in a different class.

The GTX 970's broader benchmark record reinforces this. Its PassMark G3D score is 9,638, its PassMark GPU Compute score is 4,073, and its Geekbench Metal score is 13,595, all figures with no FirePro counterpart in the database but all consistent with a card that tripled the FirePro's compute throughput in the shared tests.

Architecture Differences

Both chips come from TSMC on a 28 nm process, which makes the divergence in everything else more interesting. The FirePro W5170M uses the Tropo chip on AMD's GCN 1.0 architecture, with 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, a density of 12.2 million transistors per square millimetre. The GTX 970 uses the GM204 chip on Maxwell 2.0, with 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die at 13.1 million transistors per square millimetre. The desktop die is more than three times the area and holds roughly 3.5 times the transistors, and that scale shows up throughout the specification sheet.

Compute resources follow the same pattern. The FirePro has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, producing a pixel rate of 14.80 GPixel/s, a texture rate of 37.00 GTexel/s, and FP32 throughput of 1,184.0 GFLOPS. The GTX 970 counters with 1,664 shading units, 104 TMUs, and 56 ROPs, delivering 65.97 GPixel/s, 122.5 GTexel/s, and 3.920 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. That is better than a quadrupling of pixel rate and more than a tripling of texture rate and raw shader throughput.

Memory tells a similar story. The FirePro carries 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus at an effective 4.5 Gbps, yielding 72.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 970 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus at 7 Gbps effective, for 224.4 GB/s. Clocks differ as well: the FirePro runs a 900 MHz base and 925 MHz boost, while the GTX 970 runs 1050 MHz base and 1178 MHz boost.

The form factors explain the gap. The FirePro W5170M is an MXM module on an MXM-A (3.0) bus with no power connectors and display outputs that depend on the portable device it inhabits. The GTX 970 is a dual-slot desktop card on PCIe 3.0 x16, drawing power through two 6-pin connectors, with a 148 W TDP, a suggested 300 W PSU, and dimensions of 267 mm length, 111 mm height, and 40 mm width. The database records no TDP for the FirePro, which itself signals how different the power envelope of an MXM module is from a desktop card with dedicated power leads.

Software support diverges too. The FirePro tops out at DirectX 12 with a 11_1 feature level and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the GTX 970 supports DirectX 12 with a 12_1 feature level and Vulkan 1.4. Both expose OpenGL 4.6. Neither card has RT cores or tensor cores.

Where Each One Wins

Strictly on benchmark wins, the answer is one-sided: the GTX 970 wins both shared tests, so every workload category represented in the database favors NVIDIA. OpenCL compute workloads favor the GTX 970 by 72.9 percent, and Vulkan workloads favor it by 54.8 percent.

But the data invites a broader reading. The FirePro belongs to the FirePro Mobile (Wx100M) generation, succeeded by Radeon Pro Mobile and descended from FirePro Mobility, which frames it as a professional mobile part rather than a gaming card. Its percentile against all GPUs in the database is 44, versus 39 for the GTX 970, an interesting wrinkle given the head-to-head results. That percentile difference likely reflects the composition of each card's benchmark record rather than superior performance, since the FirePro's average rests on two Geekbench compute tests while the GTX 970's average absorbs a long list of older PassMark DirectX tests. The GTX 970's extra connectivity, with one DVI, one HDMI 2.0, and three DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, also suits multi-monitor desktop setups in a way a device-dependent mobile module cannot.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the shared benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 wins both head-to-head tests, scoring 29,982 versus 8,140 in Geekbench OpenCL (72.9 percent ahead) and 20,005 versus 9,050 in Geekbench Vulkan (54.8 percent ahead).

Q: How much more FP32 compute does the GTX 970 have?

A: The GTX 970 delivers 3.920 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the FirePro W5170M delivers 1,184.0 GFLOPS, roughly a 3.3x advantage for the desktop card.

Q: Do they use the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes, both are built by TSMC on a 28 nm node, but the GTX 970's GM204 die is 398 mm² with 5,200 million transistors versus the FirePro's 123 mm² Tropo die with 1,500 million transistors.

Q: Which cards does the database list as their nearest rivals?

A: The FirePro W5170M sits closest to the Intel Arc A380, NVIDIA Quadro P2200, AMD Radeon HD 8870M, and NVIDIA GeForce MX330. The GTX 970's nearest rivals are the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE, AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile, and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No, both are end-of-life. The FirePro W5170M was released in August 2014 and the GTX 970 in September 2014, both preceded and succeeded by other product lines in their respective families.

Q: What API support differs?

A: The GTX 970 supports DirectX 12 at feature level 12_1 and Vulkan 1.4, while the FirePro W5170M supports DirectX 12 at feature level 11_1 and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Specification Differences

• Chip: Tropo (FirePro) versus GM204 (GTX 970)
• Architecture: GCN 1.0 versus Maxwell 2.0
• Generation: FirePro Mobile (Wx100M) versus GeForce 900
• Transistors: 1,500 million versus 5,200 million
• Die size: 123 mm² versus 398 mm²
• Transistor density: 12.2M/mm² versus 13.1M/mm²
• Clocks: 900 MHz base and 925 MHz boost versus 1050 MHz base and 1178 MHz boost
• Memory: 2 GB GDDR5, 128-bit, 72.00 GB/s versus 4 GB GDDR5, 256-bit, 224.4 GB/s
• Memory speed: 4.5 Gbps effective versus 7 Gbps effective
• Shading units: 640 versus 1,664
• TMUs: 40 versus 104
• ROPs: 16 versus 56
• Pixel rate: 14.80 GPixel/s versus 65.97 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 37.00 GTexel/s versus 122.5 GTexel/s
• FP32: 1,184.0 GFLOPS versus 3.920 TFLOPS
• TDP: not recorded versus 148 W
• Slot width: MXM Module versus Dual-slot
• Power connectors: none versus 2x 6-pin
• Suggested PSU: not recorded versus 300 W
• Bus interface: MXM-A (3.0) versus PCIe 3.0 x16
• Display outputs: portable-device-dependent versus 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2
• DirectX: 12 (11_1) versus 12 (12_1)
• Vulkan: 1.2.170 versus 1.4
• Dimensions: not recorded versus 267 mm x 111 mm x 40 mm
• Launch MSRP: not recorded versus 329 USD

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the GeForce GTX 970 is the stronger performer in every measurable contest, winning both shared benchmarks with margins of 54.8 and 72.9 percent, backed by more than three times the shader hardware, memory bandwidth, and capacity. Anyone comparing these two for compute or graphics workloads should expect the desktop card to dominate.

The FirePro W5170M's case rests on context the benchmarks do not capture: it is an MXM mobile module with no power connectors designed for portable professional systems, while the GTX 970 is a dual-slot desktop card needing a 148 W TDP envelope and two 6-pin connectors. The database shows the FirePro performing competitively against its own peer set, within two percent of cards like the Quadro P2200 and the Arc A380. But when the two cards meet on the same tests, the data leaves little ambiguity, and the GTX 970 wins every time.