AMD FirePro W5170M vs AMD Radeon 550X Comparison

The AMD Radeon 550X and AMD FirePro W5170M are two end-of-life mobile GPUs that take very different paths to similar overall performance. The 550X is a modern 14nm Polaris part with a higher clock speed and newer architecture, while the W5170M is a 28nm GCN 1.0 design with more raw shaders but lower clocks. Benchmark data shows they split their two head-to-head tests almost perfectly, with the 550X winning OpenCL by a solid margin and the W5170M edging ahead in Vulkan. This makes the choice between them heavily dependent on which API your workload favors.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 550X has a higher average benchmark score of 8,918 compared to the AMD FirePro W5170M's 8,595. The 550X also sits at the 45th percentile among all GPUs, one point higher than the W5170M's 44th percentile.

Q: How do the two compare in the OpenCL benchmark?

A: The Radeon 550X wins the geekbench_opencl test with a score of 8,866 against the FirePro W5170M's 8,140. This represents an 8.9% advantage for the 550X, which is the largest performance gap between the two cards in any test.

Q: Which GPU performs better in Vulkan workloads?

A: The FirePro W5170M wins the geekbench_vulkan test, scoring 9,050 versus the Radeon 550X's 8,970. The margin is narrow at just 0.9%, but it is enough to give the W5170M one win in the head-to-head comparison.

Q: What are the manufacturing process differences between the two?

A: The Radeon 550X is built on a 14nm process at GlobalFoundries, while the FirePro W5170M uses a 28nm process at TSMC. The 550X's newer process allows for a much higher transistor density of 21.4M per mm² compared to the W5170M's 12.2M per mm².

Q: Do both cards have the same memory configuration?

A: Yes, both cards feature 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus. However, the Radeon 550X runs its memory at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) for 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the FirePro W5170M runs at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) for just 72.00 GB/s.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The Radeon 550X has a significantly higher boost clock of 1218 MHz compared to the FirePro W5170M's 925 MHz. The 550X also has a higher base clock at 1082 MHz versus 900 MHz.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial, reflecting their different release periods. The Radeon 550X uses the Lexa chip based on GCN 4.0 architecture, part of the Polaris generation. It is built on a 14nm process at GlobalFoundries with 2,200 million transistors packed into a 103 mm² die. The FirePro W5170M, in contrast, uses the Tropo chip based on the much older GCN 1.0 architecture, from the FirePro Mobile generation. It is manufactured on a 28nm process at TSMC with 1,500 million transistors on a larger 123 mm² die.

The newer architecture gives the 550X a major clock speed advantage, but the W5170M compensates with more execution resources. The FirePro W5170M has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation units. The Radeon 550X has fewer shading units at 512, fewer TMUs at 32, but the same 16 ROPs. This means the W5170M has 25% more shaders and 25% more TMUs, but they run at much lower clocks.

The memory subsystem also differs significantly. While both use 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, the 550X achieves 112.0 GB/s bandwidth versus the W5170M's 72.00 GB/s. This is a 55.6% bandwidth advantage for the 550X, driven by its faster 1750 MHz memory clock versus 1125 MHz on the W5170M. The 550X also supports newer API features, including DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the W5170M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon 550X is the clear winner in OpenCL compute workloads. Its 8.9% lead in the geekbench_opencl test is the largest margin between the two cards. This advantage comes from its much higher clock speeds and substantially higher memory bandwidth, even though it has fewer shading units. For applications that rely on OpenCL acceleration, the 550X is the stronger choice.

The FirePro W5170M takes the Vulkan benchmark, though by a much smaller margin of 0.9%. Its advantage in this test likely comes from its higher shading unit count, which can help in certain Vulkan rendering workloads that scale well with parallel execution resources. However, the narrow margin means this is not a decisive victory.

The 550X also wins on efficiency metrics. Its 50 W TDP is notable given its higher performance, and it uses a standard PCIe 3.0 x8 interface. The W5170M uses an MXM-A (3.0) form factor, which is designed for laptops and has no published TDP. For users building or upgrading a system with a standard PCIe slot, the 550X is far more practical.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. The process node is 14nm for the 550X versus 28nm for the W5170M. The 550X uses 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die, while the W5170M has 1,500 million on a 123 mm² die. Transistor density is 21.4M per mm² for the 550X and 12.2M per mm² for the W5170M.

Clock speeds show a major divergence: the 550X has a base clock of 1082 MHz and boost of 1218 MHz, while the W5170M has a base of 900 MHz and boost of 925 MHz. Memory clocks are 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) for the 550X versus 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) for the W5170M. This results in memory bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s versus 72.00 GB/s.

The compute resources differ as well. The 550X has 512 shading units and 32 TMUs, while the W5170M has 640 shading units and 40 TMUs. Both have 16 ROPs. Pixel rate is 19.49 GPixel/s for the 550X and 14.80 GPixel/s for the W5170M. Texture rate is 38.98 GTexel/s versus 37.00 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 1,247.2 GFLOPS for the 550X and 1,184.0 GFLOPS for the W5170M. The 550X also supports FP16 at 1,247.2 GFLOPS with 1:1 ratio, while the W5170M has no FP16 data.

Form factor and interface also differ: the 550X is a dual-slot card with a 145 mm length using PCIe 3.0 x8, while the W5170M is an MXM module using MXM-A (3.0). The 550X has display outputs of 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the W5170M's outputs are portable device dependent. The 550X has a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The geekbench_opencl test shows the Radeon 550X with a decisive win. It scores 8,866 against the FirePro W5170M's 8,140, a delta of 8.9%. This is the largest performance gap between the two cards in any benchmark. The 550X's higher clocks and superior memory bandwidth appear to overcome the W5170M's additional 128 shading units, at least in this OpenCL workload. For context, the 550X's nearest rival in this metric is the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100, which scores 8,863, just 0.6% behind, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 scores 9,022, putting the 550X 1.2% behind that card.

The geekbench_vulkan test flips the result. The FirePro W5170M scores 9,050 versus the Radeon 550X's 8,970, a 0.9% margin in favor of the W5170M. This is a much closer result than the OpenCL test, indicating that the W5170M's higher shader count can be beneficial in Vulkan workloads that scale well with execution units. The W5170M's nearest rival Intel Arc A380 scores 8,558, meaning the W5170M is 0.4% ahead of that card, while the NVIDIA Quadro P2200 scores 8,686, putting the W5170M 1.1% behind it.

The average benchmark scores reflect this split, with the 550X averaging 8,918 and the W5170M averaging 8,595. The 550X's average is 3.8% higher than the W5170M's. The 550X's nearest rivals in average score include the AMD Radeon R9 M265X at 8,851 (0.8% behind) and the NVIDIA TITAN V CEO Edition at 9,037 (1.3% ahead). The W5170M's rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 8870M at 8,462 (1.6% behind) and the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 at 8,458 (1.6% behind).

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD Radeon 550X as the better overall GPU for most users. It wins the OpenCL benchmark by an 8.9% margin, has a higher average benchmark score of 8,918 versus 8,595, and delivers significantly more memory bandwidth at 112.0 GB/s versus 72.00 GB/s. Its 14nm process and 50 W TDP make it a more modern and efficient design. For workloads that use OpenCL, the choice is clear.

The FirePro W5170M does have one advantage: it wins the Vulkan benchmark by 0.9%. Users whose primary applications are Vulkan-based may see slightly better performance with the W5170M. Its higher shading unit count of 640 versus 512 could also be a factor in specific compute tasks that scale with shader count. However, the margin is small and the overall performance profile favors the 550X.

From a specification standpoint, the 550X is superior in nearly every meaningful way: newer architecture, higher clocks, more bandwidth, better API support, and a practical PCIe form factor. The W5170M's MXM form factor limits it to laptops, while the 550X can be used in a standard desktop system. Both are end-of-life products, but the 550X appears to be the more future-proof choice given its Vulkan 1.3 support versus the W5170M's Vulkan 1.2.170.

For a builder choosing between these two, the Radeon 550X is the safer recommendation. It has the higher average score, the bigger OpenCL win, and more modern features. The FirePro W5170M only makes sense for a specific use case where Vulkan performance is the sole priority and the 0.9% margin matters more than everything else.