AMD FirePro W5100 vs AMD Radeon 740M Comparison

The AMD Radeon 740M and AMD FirePro W5100 are separated by a decade of silicon design, yet their average benchmark scores land within 0.2% of each other. The 740M, a 2024 integrated graphics processor built on TSMC's 4 nm node, posts an average score of 12,870, while the 2014 FirePro W5100, a discrete workstation card on 28 nm, averages 12,847. This near-parity in aggregate output masks a stark divergence in individual workloads: the older FirePro wins decisively in OpenCL compute, while the newer IGP dominates Vulkan graphics. The data shows two very different design philosophies—one optimized for raw shader throughput, the other for modern API efficiency—converging on the same overall performance class.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two GPUs split their head-to-head benchmark results exactly one win apiece, but the margins are not symmetrical. In Geekbench OpenCL, the FirePro W5100 scores 11,888 against the Radeon 740M's 10,172, a delta of -14.4% for the 740M. This is a substantial gap—the FirePro outperforms the newer chip by roughly one-seventh in this compute-oriented test. The W5100's advantage likely stems from its 768 shading units versus the 740M's 256, giving it three times the raw shader count. Even at lower clock speeds, that hardware advantage translates into a clear OpenCL win.

The tables turn completely in Geekbench Vulkan. Here, the Radeon 740M scores 15,568, beating the FirePro W5100's 13,805 by 12.8%. This margin is nearly as large as the OpenCL deficit, but in the opposite direction. The Vulkan result is particularly telling given the architectural gap: the 740M supports Vulkan 1.4, while the W5100 tops out at Vulkan 1.2.170. The newer API implementation, combined with RDNA 3.0's modern design, gives the 740M a clear edge in this graphics-heavy workload.

Looking at the broader rival landscape, both GPUs sit in a tightly packed performance cluster. The 740M's nearest rivals include the FirePro W5100 itself (delta +0.2%), the Radeon Pro 455 (+0.3%), and the GeForce GTX 590 (+0.3%). The only rival that beats the 740M in this group is the Radeon RX 580, which posts a -0.4% delta. The FirePro W5100's rival list shows similar clustering, with the 740M showing a -0.2% delta against it. These sub-1% differences indicate that both cards occupy essentially the same performance tier in aggregate, despite their wildly different architectures and release dates.

Architecture Differences

The Radeon 740M is built on TSMC's 4 nm process node, packing 20,900 million transistors into a 137 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 152.6 million per square millimeter—an extraordinary figure enabled by modern manufacturing. The FirePro W5100, in contrast, uses TSMC's 28 nm node with just 2,080 million transistors on a larger 160 mm² die, resulting in a density of only 13.0 million per square millimeter. The 740M crams roughly ten times more transistors per area, though the W5100's die is actually larger in physical size.

The architectural lineage differs fundamentally. The 740M uses RDNA 3.0, AMD's latest graphics architecture, and belongs to the Navi III IGP generation. The FirePro W5100 is based on GCN 2.0, part of the FirePro GCN (Wx100) family. This generational shift brings significant feature differences. The 740M includes 4 dedicated ray tracing cores, a capability entirely absent from the W5100. The 740M also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the W5100 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0). Vulkan support differs similarly: 1.4 on the 740M versus 1.2.170 on the W5100.

Memory architecture represents another major divergence. The 740M uses system shared memory—its bandwidth is "System Dependent" and its bus width is likewise shared. The W5100 has dedicated 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. This dedicated memory gives the W5100 predictable, fixed memory performance, whereas the 740M's performance varies with the host system's RAM configuration. The W5100's memory clock is 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective), while the 740M's memory clock is simply listed as "System Shared."

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute throughput in OpenCL?

A: The FirePro W5100 wins OpenCL decisively, scoring 11,888 versus the Radeon 740M's 10,172—a 14.4% advantage. This is despite the 740M's higher FP32 rating of 2.867 TFLOPS versus the W5100's 1,428.5 GFLOPS.

Q: Does the Radeon 740M support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the 740M includes 4 dedicated ray tracing cores. The FirePro W5100 has no ray tracing hardware, as its GCN 2.0 architecture predates this feature.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: They are essentially tied. The 740M averages 12,870 across all benchmarks, while the W5100 averages 12,847—a difference of just 0.2%. This places the 740M at the 53rd percentile of all GPUs and the W5100 at the 52nd percentile.

Q: Which card has better Vulkan performance?

A: The Radeon 740M wins Vulkan by 12.8%, scoring 15,568 against the W5100's 13,805. The 740M also supports a newer Vulkan version (1.4 versus 1.2.170).

Q: What are the memory specifications for each?

A: The W5100 has 4 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The 740M uses System Shared memory, with bandwidth described as "System Dependent."

Q: Which GPU is still in production?

A: The Radeon 740M is Active, released on 2024-01-30. The FirePro W5100 is End-of-life, having been released on 2014-03-30.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every technical specification. The 740M uses a 4 nm process node, while the W5100 uses 28 nm. Transistor count differs dramatically: 20,900 million versus 2,080 million. Die size is 137 mm² for the 740M and 160 mm² for the W5100, making the older chip physically larger. Transistor density is 152.6M/mm² versus 13.0M/mm².

Clock speeds show the 740M's advantage: it has an 800 MHz base and 2800 MHz boost, while the W5100 lists no base or boost clocks—only a 1500 MHz memory clock (6 Gbps effective). The 740M's memory is System Shared, whereas the W5100 has 4 GB GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. Shading units favor the W5100 at 768 versus 256, as do texture mapping units (48 versus 16) and render output units (16 versus 8). However, the 740M adds 4 ray tracing cores that the W5100 lacks.

Pixel rate favors the 740M at 22.40 GPixel/s versus 14.88 GPixel/s, though texture rates are nearly identical (44.80 GTexel/s versus 44.64 GTexel/s). FP32 compute is 2.867 TFLOPS for the 740M versus 1,428.5 GFLOPS for the W5100. The 740M also supports FP16 at 2.867 TFLOPS (1:1), while the W5100 lists no FP16 capability. Power draw is similar: 45 W for the 740M and 50 W for the W5100, though the W5100 suggests a 250 W PSU. The 740M is an IGP with no power connectors, while the W5100 is a single-slot card with no power connectors, measuring 173 mm in length and 111 mm in height. Bus interfaces differ: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the 740M versus PCIe 3.0 x16 for the W5100. Display outputs are motherboard-dependent for the 740M, while the W5100 has 4x DisplayPort 1.2. API support: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (12_0), Vulkan 1.4 versus 1.2.170, with OpenGL 4.6 on both.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon 740M wins in modern graphics workloads. Its 12.8% Vulkan advantage makes it the clear choice for applications leveraging current APIs, especially those using DirectX 12 Ultimate features or ray tracing. The 4 ray tracing cores provide hardware acceleration that the W5100 cannot match. The 740M's higher pixel rate (22.40 GPixel/s versus 14.88 GPixel/s) also suggests better fill-rate-bound performance. With a 45 W TDP and IGP form factor, it fits into thin-and-light systems without discrete graphics, making it ideal for portable devices needing modern API support.

The FirePro W5100 wins in OpenCL compute workloads, posting a 14.4% higher score. Its 768 shading units—three times the 740M's count—give it a raw throughput advantage that shows in compute-heavy tasks. The dedicated 4 GB GDDR5 memory with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth provides consistent, predictable memory performance, unlike the 740M's system-dependent shared memory. As a single-slot discrete card with 4x DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, it supports multi-display workstation setups directly, without relying on motherboard outputs. Its 50 W power draw, while slightly higher than the 740M's 45 W, remains modest for a discrete card.

In aggregate, the two are inseparable—the 740M's average score of 12,870 versus the W5100's 12,847 is a statistical tie. The choice between them depends entirely on workload: Vulkan and modern graphics favor the 740M; OpenCL and legacy compute favor the W5100. The 740M's active production status and newer release date (2024 versus 2014) suggest it will receive ongoing driver support, while the W5100 is end-of-life. For new system builds, the 740M offers modern features at lower power; for existing workstation deployments, the W5100's dedicated memory and shader count remain competitive.