AMD FirePro W600 vs AMD Radeon R7 M465 Comparison

The AMD Radeon R7 M465 and AMD FirePro W600 are both end-of-life AMD parts built on the same 28 nm TSMC process, yet they target very different corners of the market. The R7 M465 is a mobile-oriented chip from the Gem System (R7 M400) generation, while the FirePro W600 is a professional workstation card from the FirePro GCN (Wx000) line. In the single benchmark available, the FirePro W600 comes out ahead, but the data reveals a closer contest than the raw scores suggest.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only benchmark in the data is a Geekbench OpenCL test, and it clearly favors the AMD FirePro W600. The FirePro W600 scores 6223, while the Radeon R7 M465 scores 5841. That is a delta of -6.1% for the R7 M465, meaning the FirePro W600 is roughly 6% faster in this compute-oriented workload. This is a meaningful gap, but not a dominant one. The FirePro W600’s win is rooted in its architectural advantages, which we will examine in the Architecture Differences section.

Looking at how each card stacks up against its own nearest rivals, the FirePro W600’s 6223 score puts it slightly above the AMD Radeon HD 6950 (6210, +0.2%) and slightly below the NVIDIA Quadro K620 (6282, -0.9%). It also trails the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER, both of which score 6270, giving the FirePro W600 a -0.7% delta against each. This places the FirePro W600 in the 36th percentile of all GPUs, a modest but respectable standing for a card from 2012.

The Radeon R7 M465, by contrast, scores 5841 and sits in the 33rd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are a mixed bag: it is 0.3% behind the AMD Radeon R5 M435 (5859), 1.5% behind the Intel UHD Graphics 730 (5929), and 1.9% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti (5731). It also trails the AMD Radeon HD 8730M (5955) by 1.9%. The R7 M465’s position among these rivals shows it is competitive with entry-level discrete and integrated graphics, but it is not a standout performer.

The head-to-head data gives the FirePro W600 a single win (1 win, 0 for the R7 M465). That said, the 6.1% delta is not insurmountable. The R7 M465 has a higher boost clock (1024 MHz vs. unknown for the FirePro W600) and a newer architecture (GCN 3.0 vs. GCN 1.0), which could close the gap in other workloads not captured by this single test. But based on the data available, the FirePro W600 is the faster card in OpenCL compute.

The Verdict

From the benchmark data alone, the AMD FirePro W600 is the better choice for raw compute performance. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 6223 is 382 points higher than the R7 M465’s 5841, a 6.1% advantage. The FirePro W600 also has a higher percentile ranking (36th vs. 33rd), indicating it outperforms a slightly larger share of the GPU population. For anyone prioritizing OpenCL performance, the FirePro W600 is the clear winner.

However, context matters. The FirePro W600 is a professional workstation card with a launch MSRP of 599 USD, a 75 W TDP, and a single-slot design with six mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. It was released on 2012-06-12, while the R7 M465 arrived later on 2016-05-14. The R7 M465, by contrast, has no listed TDP, no display outputs, and no launch MSRP in the data, suggesting it was an OEM mobile part rather than a retail desktop card. If the use case is a workstation with multi-display output, the FirePro W600’s feature set makes it the only viable option, regardless of the 6.1% benchmark delta.

For mobile or low-profile embedded systems, the R7 M465’s smaller 64-bit memory bus (vs. 128-bit) and 2 GB GDDR5 might be sufficient, but its 36.00 GB/s bandwidth is significantly lower than the FirePro W600’s 64.00 GB/s. The data does not include power draw for the R7 M465, but the FirePro W600’s 75 W TDP with no power connectors is a strong indicator of efficiency. Neither card is a modern powerhouse—both are end-of-life—but the FirePro W600’s benchmark win and professional feature set give it the edge for compute-heavy tasks.

Where Each One Wins

AMD FirePro W600 wins on: Raw OpenCL performance (6223 vs. 5841, +6.1%); memory bandwidth (64.00 GB/s vs. 36.00 GB/s); memory bus width (128-bit vs. 64-bit); pixel rate (12.00 GPixel/s vs. 8.192 GPixel/s); texture rate is nearly identical (24.00 GTexel/s vs. 24.58 GTexel/s, slight edge to R7 M465); shading units (512 vs. 384); TMUs (32 vs. 24); ROPs (16 vs. 8); FP32 compute (768.0 GFLOPS vs. 786.4 GFLOPS, slight edge to R7 M465); PCIe interface (x16 vs. x8); display outputs (6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 vs. none listed); TDP (75 W, known vs. unknown); and form factor (single-slot, 168 mm length vs. no dimensions listed).

AMD Radeon R7 M465 wins on: Boost clock (1024 MHz vs. none listed); architecture generation (GCN 3.0 vs. GCN 1.0); transistor density (12.4M / mm² vs. 12.2M / mm²); fp16 compute (786.4 GFLOPS with 1:1 ratio vs. none listed); texture rate (24.58 GTexel/s vs. 24.00 GTexel/s); FP32 compute (786.4 GFLOPS vs. 768.0 GFLOPS); and DirectX support (12_0 vs. 11_1). The R7 M465 also has a slightly smaller die (125 mm² vs. 123 mm², so FirePro W600 is smaller) and fewer transistors (1,550 million vs. 1,500 million, so R7 M465 has more).

The R7 M465’s wins are mostly in clock speed and newer architecture features, but these do not translate to a benchmark victory. The FirePro W600’s wider memory bus and higher bandwidth are decisive in the OpenCL test.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD FirePro W600 scores 6223, which is 6.1% higher than the AMD Radeon R7 M465’s 5841.

Q: How does the FirePro W600 compare to its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon HD 6950?

A: The FirePro W600 scores 6223, which is 0.2% higher than the HD 6950’s 6210.

Q: What is the R7 M465’s closest competitor in the data?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M435, with an average score of 5859, is just 0.3% ahead of the R7 M465’s 5841.

Q: Does the R7 M465 have any performance advantage over the FirePro W600?

A: Yes, in theoretical specs: the R7 M465 has a higher boost clock (1024 MHz vs. none listed) and higher FP32 compute (786.4 GFLOPS vs. 768.0 GFLOPS), but it still loses the OpenCL benchmark.

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

A: The FirePro W600 has 64.00 GB/s bandwidth on a 128-bit bus, while the R7 M465 has 36.00 GB/s on a 64-bit bus, a 28.00 GB/s difference.

Q: Which card supports more display outputs?

A: The FirePro W600 has 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, while the R7 M465 lists no display outputs in the data.

Architecture Differences

The two cards share the same 28 nm TSMC process and are both built by AMD, but their internal designs diverge significantly. The Radeon R7 M465 uses the Topaz chip with GCN 3.0 architecture, part of the Gem System (R7 M400) generation. The FirePro W600 uses the Cape Verde chip with GCN 1.0 architecture, from the FirePro GCN (Wx000) generation. This generational gap means the R7 M465 has access to newer instruction sets and features, reflected in its DirectX 12_0 support versus the FirePro W600’s DirectX 11_1 support. Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Transistor counts are nearly identical: 1,550 million for the R7 M465 and 1,500 million for the FirePro W600. Die sizes are also close, at 125 mm² and 123 mm² respectively, yielding transistor densities of 12.4M / mm² and 12.2M / mm². The core configurations differ: the R7 M465 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, while the FirePro W600 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. That gives the FirePro W600 128 more shaders and double the ROPs, which helps explain its higher pixel rate (12.00 GPixel/s vs. 8.192 GPixel/s).

Memory is a major differentiator. Both cards have 2 GB of GDDR5, but the FirePro W600 uses a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the R7 M465 is limited to a 64-bit bus with 36.00 GB/s. Memory clocks are 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) for the FirePro W600 and 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) for the R7 M465, but the wider bus wins out. The R7 M465’s boost clock is 1024 MHz with a base of 730 MHz; the FirePro W600 has no listed base or boost clocks.

The FirePro W600 is a professional card with a 75 W TDP, single-slot form factor, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 250 W. Its dimensions are 168 mm (6.6 inches) long, 111 mm (4.4 inches) tall, and 20 mm (0.8 inches) wide. It connects via PCIe 3.0 x16. The R7 M465 has no listed TDP, dimensions, or power connectors, and uses PCIe 3.0 x8. The FirePro W600’s six mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs make it a multi-display workstation card; the R7 M465 lists no display outputs, consistent with an OEM mobile part. The FirePro W600’s release date is 2012-06-12, while the R7 M465 launched 2016-05-14. The FirePro W600’s predecessor is FirePro Terascale and its successor is Radeon Pro Polaris; the R7 M465’s predecessor is Solar System and its successor is Polaris Mobile.