AMD FirePro W7100 vs NVIDIA Tesla M60 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Tesla M60 is the clear benchmark winner in this comparison, taking both recorded head-to-head tests. The AMD FirePro W7100 does not win a single test in the database. The M60 leads by 22% in Geekbench OpenCL and 14.3% in Geekbench Vulkan. This is not a close contest; the data shows a consistent advantage for the NVIDIA card across both compute APIs.

The Tesla M60 achieves an average benchmark score of 30,490 points, placing it in the 75th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The FirePro W7100 averages 25,856 points, sitting in the 71st percentile. The gap in raw compute performance is substantial, and the M60's higher percentile ranking reflects its stronger standing among all recorded graphics cards.

For workloads that rely on OpenCL compute, such as general-purpose GPU computing, scientific simulation, or rendering tasks, the Tesla M60 delivers markedly higher throughput. The 22% delta in OpenCL means that for every 100 units of work the FirePro completes, the Tesla finishes 122. Similarly, in Vulkan compute tasks, the M60 outperforms the W7100 by 14.3%, a meaningful margin for any application that leverages this modern API.

The FirePro W7100 does have advantages in physical attributes. It is a single-slot card with a lower 150 W TDP, while the Tesla M60 is dual-slot with a 300 W TDP. The W7100 also offers 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, whereas the M60 has no display outputs at all. These differences matter for specific use cases, but they do not translate into any benchmark win for the AMD card.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent fundamentally different architectural approaches from their respective manufacturers. The NVIDIA Tesla M60 uses the GM204 chip built on Maxwell 2.0 architecture, while the AMD FirePro W7100 uses the Tonga chip based on GCN 3.0. Both are manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but their transistor counts and die sizes differ slightly. The M60 packs 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die, while the W7100 has 5,000 million transistors on a 366 mm² die. This results in a transistor density of 13.1M per mm² for NVIDIA and 13.7M per mm² for AMD.

The shading unit counts favor NVIDIA. The Tesla M60 has 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation units. The FirePro W7100 has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The M60 has double the ROP count of the W7100, which directly impacts pixel fill rate. The Tesla M60 delivers 75.39 GPixel/s, while the FirePro W7100 manages 29.44 GPixel/s. Texture fill rate also favors NVIDIA at 150.8 GTexel/s versus 103.0 GTexel/s for the AMD card.

Clock speeds differ notably. The Tesla M60 has a base clock of 557 MHz and a boost clock of 1178 MHz. The FirePro W7100 has no recorded base or boost clock in the database, but its memory clock is nearly identical at 1250 MHz compared to the M60's 1253 MHz. Both cards use 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, with bandwidth figures of 160.4 GB/s for the M60 and 160.0 GB/s for the W7100. Memory performance is essentially a tie.

Compute throughput shows a clear NVIDIA advantage. The Tesla M60 delivers 4.825 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the FirePro W7100 provides 3.297 TFLOPS. Interestingly, the W7100 has a 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio at 3.297 TFLOPS, while the M60 has no recorded FP16 capability. This could matter for workloads that use FP16 precision, but the overall FP32 gap of 46% favors NVIDIA heavily.

API support differs in version levels. The M60 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The W7100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The M60's higher DirectX feature level and newer Vulkan version indicate better support for modern graphics and compute features. Both cards are end-of-life products, with the M60 released in August 2015 and the W7100 in August 2014.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct comparisons between these cards. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA Tesla M60 scores 29,506 points against the AMD FirePro W7100's 24,182 points. This represents a 22% advantage for NVIDIA. In Geekbench Vulkan, the M60 scores 31,473 points, while the W7100 scores 27,529 points, a 14.3% delta in favor of NVIDIA.

The Vulkan result is worth additional scrutiny. The M60's Vulkan score is higher than its OpenCL score by 1,967 points, suggesting strong optimization for this API. The W7100 also improves in Vulkan relative to OpenCL, gaining 3,347 points, but this improvement is insufficient to close the gap. The M60's lead narrows from 22% in OpenCL to 14.3% in Vulkan, indicating that the AMD card benefits relatively more from Vulkan's lower overhead, though it still trails significantly.

Looking at the broader context, the Tesla M60's average benchmark score of 30,490 places it just ahead of the NVIDIA CMP 70HX with an average score of 30,476 and a delta of 0%. The M60 also edges out the AMD Radeon RX 6700 (30,433, 0.2% delta), the AMD Radeon RX 6800 (30,095, 1.3% delta), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Ti (29,945, 1.8% delta). These are all modern consumer and mining-oriented cards, and the M60 holds its own against them despite being an older professional product.

The FirePro W7100's nearest rivals tell a different story. It sits close to the AMD FirePro D700 (25,842, 0.1% delta) and the AMD Radeon R9 M395X (25,891, -0.1% delta). It also compares to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile (25,740, 0.5% delta) and the AMD Radeon Pro W5700 (25,726, 0.5% delta). The W7100's position among these rivals shows it performs in line with older professional GPUs and mobile variants, rather than competing with modern desktop hardware.

The pixel rate advantage for the M60 is dramatic. At 75.39 GPixel/s, it outperforms the W7100's 29.44 GPixel/s by more than 2.5 times. This is directly attributable to the M60's 64 ROPs versus the W7100's 32 ROPs. For any workload that is fill-rate limited, such as high-resolution rendering with heavy overdraw, the M60 has a decisive edge.

The Verdict

The NVIDIA Tesla M60 is the superior performer in every recorded benchmark. It wins both head-to-head tests, has a higher average benchmark score, and sits in a higher percentile of all GPUs. The 22% OpenCL lead and 14.3% Vulkan lead are substantial margins that translate into real-world compute advantages. Users who prioritize raw throughput should choose the M60 without hesitation.

The AMD FirePro W7100, however, is not without merit. Its single-slot design, lower 150 W TDP, and 1x 6-pin power connector make it far easier to integrate into space-constrained or power-limited systems. The 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs are a significant feature for multi-display workstation setups, something the M60 cannot offer at all. The W7100 also has FP16 capability at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, which the M60 lacks entirely.

For compute-heavy workloads where benchmark scores matter most, the Tesla M60 is the clear choice. Its 4.825 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, 75.39 GPixel/s pixel rate, and 150.8 GTexel/s texture rate provide a level of throughput that the W7100 cannot match. The M60's 300 W TDP and dual-slot footprint are acceptable trade-offs for this performance level.

For workstation environments that require multiple displays, limited physical space, or strict power budgets, the FirePro W7100 is the practical option. Its 150 W TDP means lower cooling requirements and potentially quieter operation. The single-slot design allows for denser multi-GPU configurations. The 4x DisplayPort outputs support up to four monitors directly, while the M60 requires a separate display adapter.

The data does not support a balanced recommendation. The Tesla M60 wins every benchmark and offers significantly higher compute throughput. The FirePro W7100 wins on physical characteristics and display connectivity, but these advantages do not appear in any performance metric. Buyers should select based on their primary need: maximum compute performance for the M60, or maximum flexibility and efficiency for the W7100.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Tesla M60 averages 30,490 points, while the AMD FirePro W7100 averages 25,856 points, a difference of 4,634 points.

Q: How much faster is the Tesla M60 in OpenCL?

A: The M60 scores 29,506 points compared to the W7100's 24,182 points, giving it a 22% advantage in Geekbench OpenCL.

Q: Can the FirePro W7100 connect to multiple displays?

A: Yes, the W7100 has 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, while the Tesla M60 has no display outputs at all.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Tesla M60 has a 300 W TDP and requires a 700 W suggested PSU, while the FirePro W7100 has a 150 W TDP and a 450 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which card supports FP16 compute?

A: The AMD FirePro W7100 supports FP16 at 3.297 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio with FP32), while the NVIDIA Tesla M60 has no recorded FP16 capability.

Q: How do these cards compare to modern GPUs in the database?

A: The M60 ranks at the 75th percentile, close to the NVIDIA CMP 70HX and AMD Radeon RX 6700. The W7100 ranks at the 71st percentile, similar to the AMD FirePro D700 and AMD Radeon R9 M395X.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Tesla M60 | AMD FirePro W7100 |

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

| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 3.0 |

| Chip | GM204 | Tonga |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 5,200 million | 5,000 million |

| Die Size | 398 mm² | 366 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.1M / mm² | 13.7M / mm² |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 1792 |

| TMUs | 128 | 112 |

| ROPs | 64 | 32 |

| Base Clock | 557 MHz | Not recorded |

| Boost Clock | 1178 MHz | Not recorded |

| Memory Clock | 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) | 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 160.4 GB/s | 160.0 GB/s |

| Pixel Rate | 75.39 GPixel/s | 29.44 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 150.8 GTexel/s | 103.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 4.825 TFLOPS | 3.297 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | Not recorded | 3.297 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 300 W | 150 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 700 W | 450 W |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 4x DisplayPort 1.2 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_0) |

| OpenGL Support | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.2.170 |

| Length | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | 241 mm (9.5 inches) |

| Height | Not recorded | 111 mm (4.4 inches) |

| Release Date | 2015-08-29 | 2014-08-11 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | End-of-life |