AMD FirePro W5170M vs NVIDIA Quadro 5000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a single direct head-to-head benchmark comparison between these two professional mobile graphics solutions, and the results are decisive. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD FirePro W5170M scores 8140 points, while the NVIDIA Quadro 5000 scores 7289 points. This gives the AMD part an 11.7% advantage in raw compute performance as measured by this workload. The delta is substantial, and it establishes the FirePro as the faster card for OpenCL compute tasks, at least in this particular test.

The AMD FirePro W5170M also holds a second recorded benchmark score, a Geekbench Vulkan result of 9050 points. The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 has no Vulkan score recorded in the database, which is consistent with its older architecture generation. This missing data point is itself informative: it suggests that the Quadro 5000 may not have been validated for Vulkan workloads, or that the hardware is not capable of running them effectively. The absence of a comparable Vulkan score means the AMD card has a functional advantage in modern graphics APIs that the NVIDIA card cannot contest.

When placed in the broader context of all GPUs in the database, the AMD FirePro W5170M sits at the 44th percentile, while the NVIDIA Quadro 5000 sits at the 40th percentile. The average benchmark score for the AMD card, combining its OpenCL and Vulkan results, is 8595. The NVIDIA card's average score is simply its OpenCL score of 7289, as no other benchmark is recorded. This creates a gap of roughly 1306 points in the average, or about 17.9% higher for the AMD part.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each card provides additional perspective. The AMD FirePro W5170M's closest competitor in the database is the Intel Arc A380, which has an average score of 8558, a difference of only 0.4%. The AMD card is also 1.1% behind the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 (average score 8686) and 1.6% ahead of both the AMD Radeon HD 8870M (8462) and the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (8458). This places the FirePro in a tight cluster of mid-range performers, where small percentage swings separate adjacent entries.

The NVIDIA Quadro 5000's nearest rivals show a similar clustering but at a lower performance tier. The GeForce GTX 750 is 0.9% behind with an average score of 7222, the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile is 1.2% behind with 7203, the GeForce GTX 560 SE is 1.6% behind with 7171, and the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P580 is 1.7% behind with 7170. The Quadro 5000 sits just above these entries, but the margins are slim. The data suggests that the Quadro 5000 is competing with a group of older or more modest GPUs, while the FirePro is competing with a group that includes newer Intel and NVIDIA parts.

The head-to-head result is the only direct measurement available, but it is consistent with the percentile rankings and the average scores. The AMD FirePro W5170M wins the only shared benchmark, and it does so by a meaningful margin. The question is whether this single data point tells the whole story, or whether other factors such as architecture and specifications explain the performance difference in ways that matter for specific use cases.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the only direct benchmark comparison in the database?

A: The AMD FirePro W5170M wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 8140, compared to the NVIDIA Quadro 5000's score of 7289, a delta of 11.7% in favor of the AMD card.

Q: Does the NVIDIA Quadro 5000 have a Vulkan benchmark score?

A: No, the database records no Vulkan score for the Quadro 5000. The AMD FirePro W5170M has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 9050, which is higher than its own OpenCL score.

Q: How do the two cards compare in overall GPU percentile rankings?

A: The AMD FirePro W5170M is at the 44th percentile of all GPUs, while the NVIDIA Quadro 5000 is at the 40th percentile. This indicates that the AMD card ranks higher in the database's overall performance distribution.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each card?

A: The AMD FirePro W5170M has an average benchmark score of 8595 across its two recorded tests. The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 has an average benchmark score of 7289, based solely on its OpenCL result.

Q: Which GPU has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 has a memory bandwidth of 120.0 GB/s, while the AMD FirePro W5170M has 72.00 GB/s. The Quadro 5000 also has a wider memory bus (320 bit vs 128 bit) and more memory (2.5 GB vs 2 GB).

Q: What is the transistor count difference between the two chips?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 5000's GF100 chip contains 3,100 million transistors, while the AMD FirePro W5170M's Tropo chip contains 1,500 million transistors. The NVIDIA chip is larger in die size as well, 529 mm² versus 123 mm².

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two professional GPUs is stark and explains much of the performance data. The AMD FirePro W5170M is built on the Graphics Core Next 1.0 architecture, codenamed Tropo, and fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 uses the Fermi architecture, with the GF100 chip, fabricated on a 40 nm process, also at TSMC. The process node difference is significant: 28 nm versus 40 nm means the AMD chip uses a denser manufacturing technology, which allows for more transistors in a smaller area.

The transistor density figures illustrate this clearly. The AMD Tropo chip packs 1,500 million transistors into a die size of 123 mm², yielding a density of 12.2 million transistors per square millimeter. The NVIDIA GF100 chip contains 3,100 million transistors in a much larger die of 529 mm², resulting in a density of only 5.9 million transistors per square millimeter. The AMD chip is more than twice as dense, which is a direct consequence of the newer manufacturing process.

Despite having fewer total transistors, the AMD FirePro W5170M achieves higher compute throughput. Its FP32 performance is rated at 1,184.0 GFLOPS, compared to 722.3 GFLOPS for the NVIDIA Quadro 5000. The AMD card also has more shading units, 640 versus 352, and a higher texture rate, 37.00 GTexel/s versus 22.57 GTexel/s. However, the NVIDIA card has more ROPs, 40 versus 16, and more TMUs, 44 versus 40. The pixel rate favors the AMD card, 14.80 GPixel/s versus 11.29 GPixel/s, despite the ROP disadvantage.

Memory architecture also differs substantially. The AMD card uses a 128-bit memory bus with 72.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the NVIDIA card uses a 320-bit bus with 120.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA card has more memory, 2.5 GB versus 2 GB, and both use GDDR5. The effective memory clock differs as well: the AMD card runs at 4.5 Gbps effective, while the NVIDIA card runs at 3 Gbps effective. The NVIDIA card compensates for its lower clock with a much wider bus.

The API support tells a story of generational change. The AMD FirePro W5170M supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support recorded. This means the AMD card is ready for modern graphics APIs, while the NVIDIA card is limited to older API generations. The AMD card also belongs to a newer generation, FirePro Mobile (Wx100M), while the NVIDIA card belongs to Quadro Fermi (x000). The release dates confirm the gap: the AMD card was released in August 2014, while the NVIDIA card was released in February 2011.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification, with only a few shared attributes. The AMD FirePro W5170M uses a 28 nm process, while the NVIDIA Quadro 5000 uses a 40 nm process. The AMD chip, Tropo, has 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, while the NVIDIA GF100 has 3,100 million transistors on a 529 mm² die. The AMD card has a base clock of 900 MHz and a boost clock of 925 MHz, while the NVIDIA card has no base or boost clock listed in the database. The memory clock differs as well: 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) for AMD versus 750 MHz (3 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA.

Memory configuration is a major differentiator. The AMD card has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 72.00 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA card has 2.5 GB of GDDR5 on a 320-bit bus, yielding 120.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD card has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The NVIDIA card has 352 shading units, 44 TMUs, and 40 ROPs. The compute rates favor AMD: 1,184.0 GFLOPS FP32 versus 722.3 GFLOPS, 37.00 GTexel/s versus 22.57 GTexel/s, and 14.80 GPixel/s versus 11.29 GPixel/s.

Power and physical specifications differ markedly. The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 has a TDP of 152 W, requires a 450 W suggested PSU, uses a dual-slot form factor with a 1x 6-pin power connector, and measures 248 mm in length and 111 mm in height. The AMD FirePro W5170M has no TDP listed, uses an MXM Module form factor with no power connectors, and its dimensions are listed as portable device dependent. The bus interface also differs: MXM-A (3.0) for AMD versus PCIe 2.0 x16 for NVIDIA. Display outputs are portable device dependent for AMD, while NVIDIA lists 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort.

The release dates are separated by over three years, and both are marked as end-of-life. The AMD card has no launch MSRP recorded, while the NVIDIA card has a launch MSRP of 2,499 USD. The API support differs in DirectX version (12 (11_1) for AMD versus 12 (11_0) for NVIDIA) and in Vulkan support (1.2.170 for AMD, none for NVIDIA). Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro W5170M wins in compute performance, as shown by its 11.7% advantage in the Geekbench OpenCL test and its higher FP32 throughput of 1,184.0 GFLOPS versus 722.3 GFLOPS. It also wins in modern API support, with Vulkan 1.2.170 available and a higher DirectX feature level. The AMD card's higher texture rate and pixel rate suggest it may handle texture-heavy workloads and fill-rate-bound scenarios better, despite having fewer ROPs. Its 28 nm process and higher transistor density indicate better power efficiency per transistor, even though no TDP is recorded for the AMD card.

The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 wins in memory capacity and bandwidth. Its 2.5 GB of memory exceeds the AMD card's 2 GB, and its 120.0 GB/s bandwidth is 66.7% higher than the AMD card's 72.00 GB/s. The 320-bit memory bus gives it a substantial advantage in memory-intensive workloads, such as large data sets or high-resolution textures that exceed the AMD card's capacity. The NVIDIA card also has more ROPs, 40 versus 16, which could benefit certain rasterization tasks, and more TMUs, 44 versus 40. Its dual-slot design with a dedicated 6-pin power connector allows for a higher TDP of 152 W, which can sustain higher clock rates under load if the cooling allows.

The NVIDIA card's larger die and transistor count, 3,100 million versus 1,500 million, suggest it was designed for a different class of workload, likely professional visualization and compute that benefits from its wider memory path. The AMD card, with its smaller die and more modern architecture, appears optimized for mobile efficiency and modern API compatibility. The MXM Module form factor and portable device dependent outputs indicate the AMD card is intended for laptops, while the NVIDIA card's dual-slot, 248 mm length, and 111 mm height are more typical of a desktop workstation card.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear picture for compute-oriented users: the AMD FirePro W5170M is the faster card in the only head-to-head benchmark available, and it offers modern API support that the NVIDIA Quadro 5000 cannot match. Its 11.7% lead in Geekbench OpenCL, combined with its Vulkan capability and higher percentile ranking (44th versus 40th), makes it the better choice for users who prioritize raw compute throughput and compatibility with current graphics APIs. The AMD card's higher FP32 rate, texture rate, and pixel rate reinforce this conclusion.

However, the NVIDIA Quadro 5000 remains relevant for memory-bound workloads. Its 2.5 GB frame buffer and 120.0 GB/s bandwidth, driven by a 320-bit bus, are significantly larger than the AMD card's 2 GB and 72.00 GB/s. For tasks that require large working sets or high-bandwidth data movement, the NVIDIA card may hold an advantage that its lower compute scores do not reflect. Its higher TDP of 152 W and desktop-oriented design also suggest it can sustain performance in a workstation chassis.

The release dates matter. The NVIDIA Quadro 5000 launched in February 2011, over three years before the AMD FirePro W5170M's August 2014 debut. The architectural gap, Fermi versus GCN 1.0, and the process node difference, 40 nm versus 28 nm, explain why the AMD card dominates in compute metrics. Users with legacy software that does not require Vulkan may find the NVIDIA card adequate, but its lack of Vulkan support is a growing limitation.

For a modern professional workload that uses OpenCL or Vulkan, the AMD FirePro W5170M is the stronger choice based on the recorded data. For memory-intensive applications where the 2.5 GB capacity and 120.0 GB/s bandwidth are essential, the NVIDIA Quadro 5000 has a specific, narrower appeal. The benchmark results show a single decisive win for AMD, and the specification differences support that outcome for most compute scenarios. The NVIDIA card's memory advantages are real, but they do not translate into a benchmark win in the recorded test. Users should weigh the compute dominance of the AMD card against the memory capacity of the NVIDIA card, with the understanding that the AMD card is both newer and better positioned for future software.