AMD FirePro W7100 vs NVIDIA GeForce MX550 Comparison

# NVIDIA GeForce MX550 vs AMD FirePro W7100

The GeForce MX550 and FirePro W7100 represent two very different generations of GPU design, and the benchmark data reflects a split decision. The MX550, built on NVIDIA's Turing architecture at 12 nm, posts an average benchmark score of 26421, placing it in the 72nd percentile among all GPUs. The FirePro W7100, using AMD's older GCN 3.0 architecture on a 28 nm process, achieves an average score of 25856, landing in the 71st percentile. The two cards are separated by just 565 points in average score—a 2.1% gap that puts them in essentially the same performance class, though their individual workload strengths diverge sharply.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results show a clear split: the FirePro W7100 dominates in OpenCL, while the MX550 takes a decisive win in Vulkan. In Geekbench OpenCL, the FirePro W7100 scores 24182 against the MX550's 20372, a delta of -15.8% for the MX550. That's a substantial margin—the FirePro is roughly 18.7% faster in absolute terms, translating to a lead of 3810 points. This OpenCL advantage aligns with the FirePro's workstation pedigree; its 1792 shading units and 112 texture mapping units provide raw compute throughput that older API workloads can leverage effectively.

Vulkan tells the opposite story. The MX550 scores 32469 in Geekbench Vulkan, versus the FirePro W7100's 27529, giving the NVIDIA part a 17.9% advantage—a difference of 4940 points. This is the larger margin of the two tests, and it reflects the Turing architecture's more modern feature set and driver optimization for contemporary graphics APIs. The MX550's 1024 shading units are fewer, but they operate within a design that supports Vulkan 1.4, compared to the FirePro's Vulkan 1.2.170 support.

Each card claims one win, and the deltas are asymmetric: the FirePro's OpenCL victory margin (-15.8%) is slightly smaller than the MX550's Vulkan victory margin (17.9%). In practical terms, this means the MX550's strongest workload advantage is more pronounced than the FirePro's, but the FirePro's broader shading unit count (1792 vs 1024) and higher pixel rate (29.44 GPixel/s vs 21.12 GPixel/s) make it the more balanced compute performer in legacy API scenarios.

The Verdict

The data does not crown a single winner; it identifies two distinct use cases. For applications that rely heavily on Vulkan—modern games, emulators, and newer content-creation tools—the MX550 is the clear choice. Its 17.9% Vulkan lead is substantial, and its 32469 score places it well ahead of the FirePro's 27529. The MX550's Turing architecture also brings a 12 nm process node, which explains its 25 W TDP against the FirePro's 150 W—a massive efficiency gap that matters for any compact or battery-powered system.

For OpenCL-centric workloads—older professional applications, certain compute tasks, and legacy CAD tools—the FirePro W7100 delivers 18.7% more performance. Its 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth, versus the MX550's 2 GB GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus at 96.00 GB/s. That 64 GB/s bandwidth deficit and 6 GB capacity gap are decisive for memory-heavy compute tasks. The FirePro also offers 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, making it suitable for multi-monitor professional setups, while the MX550's outputs are portable-device dependent.

Buyers should pick based on API priority. The MX550 wins for Vulkan workloads and efficiency; the FirePro wins for OpenCL and memory capacity. The nearest rival data reinforces the parity: the MX550 sits within 0.1% of the AMD Radeon 860M and 0.3% of the RTX 5060, while the FirePro is 0.1% from the FirePro D700 and 0.5% from the Radeon Pro W5700. Neither card is a decisive overall winner—they are two specialized tools.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational. The MX550 uses NVIDIA's TU117SB chip, built on a 12 nm process at TSMC, with 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. That yields a transistor density of 23.5 million per square millimeter—a figure that reflects the more modern manufacturing process. The FirePro W7100 uses AMD's Tonga chip on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC, with 5,000 million transistors on a 366 mm² die, giving a density of just 13.7 million per square millimeter. The FirePro has 300 million more transistors but occupies 166 mm² more silicon, underlining how much process technology has advanced.

Memory configurations differ sharply. The MX550 pairs 2 GB of GDDR6 with a 64-bit bus, running at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) for 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro offers 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective), delivering 160.0 GB/s—66.7% more bandwidth. The FirePro's memory capacity is four times larger, which is critical for large datasets, but its GDDR5 memory type and lower effective clock speed show its age.

Compute resources also diverge. The MX550 has 1024 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with peak rates of 21.12 GPixel/s and 42.24 GTexel/s, and 2.703 TFLOPS FP32 (and matching FP16 at 1:1). The FirePro fields 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, achieving 29.44 GPixel/s and 103.0 GTexel/s, with 3.297 TFLOPS FP32 (also 1:1 FP16). The FirePro has 75% more shading units, 3.5 times the TMUs, and double the ROPs, yet its FP32 advantage is only 22%—evidence that per-clock efficiency has improved significantly in the newer architecture.

The MX550 supports PCIe 4.0 x8, while the FirePro uses PCIe 3.0 x16. DirectX support is 12_1 for the MX550 versus 12_0 for the FirePro. Both support OpenGL 4.6, but Vulkan support differs: 1.4 on the MX550 versus 1.2.170 on the FirePro. Power requirements are equally divergent: the MX550 draws 25 W with no power connectors and an IGP form factor, while the FirePro consumes 150 W, needs a single 6-pin connector, and ships as a single-slot card measuring 241 mm (9.5 inches) long and 111 mm (4.4 inches) tall, with a suggested 450 W PSU.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX550 leads with an average score of 26421, compared to the AMD FirePro W7100's 25856—a 2.1% difference. The MX550 sits in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs, while the FirePro is in the 71st.

Q: How do they compare in OpenCL performance?

A: The AMD FirePro W7100 wins Geekbench OpenCL with a score of 24182, beating the MX550's 20372 by 15.8%. This gives the FirePro an 18.7% raw performance advantage in that test.

Q: Which card is better for Vulkan workloads?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX550 is significantly better, scoring 32469 in Geekbench Vulkan versus the FirePro's 27529. That's a 17.9% lead, or 4940 points, and the MX550 supports Vulkan 1.4 while the FirePro supports Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: What are the memory capacity and bandwidth differences?

A: The FirePro W7100 has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MX550 has 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 96.00 GB/s. The FirePro offers four times the capacity and 66.7% more bandwidth.

Q: Which card has higher power consumption?

A: The FirePro W7100 draws 150 W and requires a 6-pin power connector, while the MX550 consumes only 25 W with no power connector. The FirePro's suggested PSU is 450 W, whereas the MX550 is an IGP with no PSU recommendation.

Q: How do their nearest rivals compare?

A: The MX550's closest rival is the AMD Radeon 860M at a 0.1% delta, followed by the RTX 5060 at 0.3%. The FirePro W7100 sits 0.1% from the AMD FirePro D700 and 0.5% from the Radeon Pro W5700.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce MX550 wins decisively in Vulkan-based workloads. Its 32469 Vulkan score is 17.9% higher than the FirePro's, making it the better choice for modern game engines, Vulkan-native applications, and any workload that leverages the newer API's lower overhead. The MX550's 12 nm Turing architecture also enables a 25 W TDP, so it excels in thin-and-light laptops, compact systems, and any scenario where power efficiency is paramount. Its PCIe 4.0 x8 interface provides higher per-lane bandwidth, and its support for Vulkan 1.4 means better forward compatibility with emerging software. The MX550's FP16 performance matches its FP32 at 2.703 TFLOPS, which can accelerate certain machine-learning inference tasks.

The AMD FirePro W7100 wins in OpenCL and memory-bound scenarios. Its 24182 OpenCL score beats the MX550 by 15.8%, and its 8 GB frame buffer is four times larger, making it suitable for large textures, complex CAD models, or compute datasets that exceed 2 GB. The FirePro's 160.0 GB/s bandwidth—66.7% higher than the MX550—benefits memory-intensive operations, and its 1792 shading units provide substantial parallel throughput for compute tasks. The 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs make it a natural fit for multi-monitor professional workstations. The FirePro also has a higher pixel rate (29.44 GPixel/s vs 21.12 GPixel/s) and texture rate (103.0 GTexel/s vs 42.24 GTexel/s), which matters for fill-rate-limited scenarios.

The data shows a tie in win count, but the workloads are not equal in importance. The MX550's Vulkan lead is larger in percentage terms and aligns with the direction of modern software development. The FirePro's OpenCL lead, while real, addresses a legacy API that is gradually being supplanted. For new purchases, the MX550 is the more future-proof option, provided 2 GB of memory is sufficient. For existing professional environments with OpenCL dependencies and large memory requirements, the FirePro W7100 remains a capable—if power-hungry—workhorse.