AMD FirePro W5170M vs NVIDIA GeForce MX330 Comparison

The AMD FirePro W5170M and NVIDIA GeForce MX330 are two end-of-life mobile graphics solutions from different eras, and the benchmark data shows a surprisingly close contest. The older FirePro, built on GCN 1.0, edges out the newer Pascal-based MX330 in both recorded tests, though the margins are slim. The data indicates a 44th percentile ranking for the AMD part versus a 43rd for the NVIDIA, placing both firmly in the lower-midrange of the GPU landscape.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results favor the AMD FirePro W5170M in both disciplines, but the nature of those victories differs significantly. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the FirePro W5170M scores 8140 against the MX330's 7896, a 3.1% advantage. This is the more decisive win of the two, suggesting the AMD part holds a clearer edge in compute workloads that leverage OpenCL. The margin is meaningful but not overwhelming; it separates the two without creating a chasm in raw performance.

The Vulkan results tell a different story, one of near-parity. The FirePro W5170M scores 9050, while the MX330 trails by a hair at 9019, a delta of just 0.3%. This is effectively a statistical tie, indicating that in Vulkan-based applications, users would be hard-pressed to notice any difference between the two. The data shows that while the AMD card wins the test outright, the practical performance gap in this API is negligible.

Looking at the broader context from the nearestRivals data, both GPUs sit in a tight cluster. The FirePro W5170M's average benchmark score of 8595 places it just 0.4% ahead of the Intel Arc A380 (8558) and 1.6% ahead of both the AMD Radeon HD 8870M (8462) and the MX330 itself (8458). Meanwhile, the MX330's own average of 8458 is within 0.3% of the AMD Radeon 880M (8436) and 0.4% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (8427). This indicates that both cards are trading blows with a similar tier of hardware, and neither represents a class-leading outlier in its generation.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural philosophies and manufacturing nodes. The AMD FirePro W5170M is built on the GCN 1.0 architecture using a 28 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 123 mm² and 1,500 million transistors. In contrast, the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 utilizes the Pascal architecture on a more advanced 14 nm process at Samsung, packing 1,800 million transistors into a smaller 74 mm² die. This results in a dramatically higher transistor density for the NVIDIA part: 24.3M / mm² versus 12.2M / mm² for the AMD chip.

The compute configurations diverge as well. The FirePro W5170M fields 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The MX330 counters with fewer resources: 384 shading units and 24 TMUs, though it also has 16 ROPs. Clock speeds favor the NVIDIA part substantially, with a base clock of 1531 MHz and a boost of 1594 MHz, compared to the AMD's 900 MHz base and 925 MHz boost. Despite the higher clocks, the MX330's lower shader count keeps its peak FP32 throughput at 1,224.2 GFLOPS, only marginally ahead of the FirePro's 1,184.0 GFLOPS.

Memory configurations differ in bus width and bandwidth. The AMD card uses a 128-bit bus for its 2 GB of GDDR5, delivering 72.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The MX330 also has 2 GB of GDDR5 but on a narrower 64-bit bus, capping bandwidth at 56.06 GB/s. Effective memory speeds are 4.5 Gbps for the AMD and 7 Gbps for the NVIDIA, though the wider bus gives the FirePro the aggregate bandwidth advantage. The MX330 compensates with a much lower 10 W TDP, whereas the FirePro has no listed TDP, but its MXM module form factor suggests a higher power envelope than the IGP-style MX330.

The Verdict

From the data, the AMD FirePro W5170M is the nominal winner in raw benchmark performance, taking both the OpenCL and Vulkan tests. Its 3.1% lead in OpenCL is the most significant margin in this comparison, making it the better choice for compute-oriented tasks that rely on that API. The 0.3% Vulkan edge is negligible, so gamers or users of Vulkan-based applications should not expect any meaningful advantage from either card.

However, the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 offers a different set of trade-offs that the data cannot ignore. Its 10 W TDP is a listed specification, while the FirePro's is absent, implying the MX330 is far more power-efficient. For thin-and-light laptops where battery life and thermals are paramount, the MX330's architectural efficiency—achieving nearly identical FP32 throughput with fewer shaders and a denser 14 nm process—makes it a compelling option despite losing the benchmark race.

The choice hinges on priorities. If absolute performance in synthetic benchmarks is the goal, the FirePro W5170M wins. If power efficiency and modern API support (the MX330 lists Vulkan 1.4 versus 1.2.170 for the AMD) matter more, the MX330 is the rational pick. The data does not support a clear winner for all use cases; it supports a split decision based on workload and platform constraints.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FirePro W5170M | NVIDIA GeForce MX330 |

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

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Pascal |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Samsung |

| Transistors | 1,500 million | 1,800 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 74 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.2M / mm² | 24.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 900 MHz | 1531 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 925 MHz | 1594 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) | 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 72.00 GB/s | 56.06 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 640 | 384 |

| TMUs | 40 | 24 |

| Pixel Rate | 14.80 GPixel/s | 25.50 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 37.00 GTexel/s | 38.26 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,184.0 GFLOPS | 1,224.2 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not listed | 19.13 GFLOPS (1:64) |

| TDP | Not listed | 10 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | IGP |

| Bus Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x4 |

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

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2014-08-24 | 2020-02-09 |

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro W5170M has an average benchmark score of 8595, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 scores 8458, giving the AMD part a 1.6% advantage.

Q: In which benchmark does the AMD FirePro W5170M have its largest lead over the MX330?

A: The largest lead is in the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the FirePro W5170M scores 8140 versus 7896 for the MX330, a 3.1% difference.

Q: How close is the Vulkan performance between the two cards?

A: The Vulkan scores are nearly identical. The AMD FirePro W5170M scores 9050, and the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 scores 9019, a margin of just 0.3%.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The AMD FirePro W5170M has a 128-bit bus providing 72.00 GB/s, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 uses a 64-bit bus with 56.06 GB/s, making the AMD card 28% faster in this metric.

Q: Does the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 have a higher clock speed?

A: Yes. The MX330 has a base clock of 1531 MHz and a boost of 1594 MHz, compared to the FirePro W5170M's 900 MHz base and 925 MHz boost.

Q: Which card has a lower power draw?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 is listed at 10 W TDP, while no TDP is listed for the AMD FirePro W5170M, suggesting the NVIDIA part is significantly more power-efficient.