AMD FirePro W5100 vs AMD Radeon Pro 455 Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD FirePro W5100 and AMD Radeon Pro 455 land in the same performance tier, separated by a razor-thin 0.1% in average benchmark score. The data shows the FirePro W5100 edges ahead with an average score of 12,847 versus the Radeon Pro 455’s 12,831, but this difference is statistically negligible. The FirePro W5100 wins both shared benchmark tests, delivering 15% higher OpenCL performance and 12.8% higher Vulkan performance. However, the Radeon Pro 455 counters with a Metal score of 15,916, a test the FirePro W5100 does not participate in.

The FirePro W5100 is the pick for users prioritizing raw compute throughput in OpenCL or Vulkan workloads, especially those needing a desktop workstation card with four DisplayPort 1.2 outputs and a single-slot form factor. The Radeon Pro 455 is the mobile-oriented choice, built as an MXM module with a lower 35 W TDP and portable-device-dependent display outputs, making it suited for Apple MacBook Pro-class systems where power efficiency and Metal API support matter more than raw multi-API compute. For users locked into the Metal ecosystem, the Radeon Pro 455’s 15,916 Metal score is a decisive advantage. For everyone else, the FirePro W5100’s lead in the two shared benchmarks makes it the stronger all-rounder.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent two distinct generations of AMD’s Graphics Core Next architecture. The FirePro W5100 uses the Bonaire chip built on GCN 2.0, manufactured on TSMC’s 28 nm process. The Radeon Pro 455 uses the Baffin chip built on GCN 4.0, manufactured on GlobalFoundries’ 14 nm process. This node shrink is substantial: the Radeon Pro 455 packs 3,000 million transistors into a 123 mm² die, while the FirePro W5100 fits 2,080 million transistors into a 160 mm² die. The result is a transistor density of 24.4 million per square millimeter for the Radeon Pro 455 versus 13.0 million per square millimeter for the FirePro W5100 — a near-doubling in density.

Core configuration is identical in count but different in capability. Both cards feature 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation units. The FirePro W5100 clocks its memory at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) versus the Radeon Pro 455’s 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective). This gives the FirePro W5100 a memory bandwidth of 96.00 GB/s versus 81.28 GB/s for the Radeon Pro 455, a 18.1% advantage for the older card. The FirePro W5100 also leads in pixel rate (14.88 GPixel/s versus 13.68 GPixel/s) and texture rate (44.64 GTexel/s versus 41.04 GTexel/s).

The Radeon Pro 455 counters with architectural improvements. Its FP32 throughput is 1,313.3 GFLOPS, and it supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio (1,313.3 GFLOPS), a feature the FirePro W5100 does not list. The Radeon Pro 455 also supports Vulkan 1.3 versus Vulkan 1.2.170 on the FirePro W5100, and it draws just 35 W versus 50 W. The FirePro W5100 uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface while the Radeon Pro 455 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, and the FirePro W5100’s 173 mm length and single-slot design contrast with the Radeon Pro 455’s MXM module form factor.

Where Each One Wins

The FirePro W5100 wins decisively in OpenCL and Vulkan compute workloads. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 11,888 versus the Radeon Pro 455’s 10,336 — a 15% lead. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 13,805 versus 12,240 — a 12.8% lead. These results track with its higher memory bandwidth (96.00 GB/s versus 81.28 GB/s), higher pixel rate, and higher texture rate. The FirePro W5100 also benefits from a wider PCIe 3.0 x16 bus interface compared to the Radeon Pro 455’s x8 connection, which can matter for data transfer-intensive workloads.

The Radeon Pro 455 wins in the Metal API, where it posts a score of 15,916. This is a significant figure given the card’s positioning in the Radeon Pro Mac (400 Series) generation, which targets Apple’s ecosystem. The Radeon Pro 455 also wins on power efficiency, drawing 35 W versus 50 W, and offers FP16 support at 1:1 ratio — a capability absent from the FirePro W5100’s specifications. For applications that leverage half-precision arithmetic, the Radeon Pro 455 has a functional advantage despite its lower raw FP32 throughput.

In terms of longevity, the Radeon Pro 455 supports Vulkan 1.3, a newer API revision than the FirePro W5100’s Vulkan 1.2.170. Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_0) and OpenGL 4.6. The Radeon Pro 455’s newer architecture also means better transistor density, which typically translates to improved efficiency per unit of silicon.

FAQ

Q: Which card has better overall benchmark performance?

A: The AMD FirePro W5100 has a marginal edge, with an average benchmark score of 12,847 versus the Radeon Pro 455’s 12,831 — a difference of just 0.1%.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro 455 beat the FirePro W5100 in any benchmark?

A: The Radeon Pro 455 scores 15,916 in Geekbench Metal, a test the FirePro W5100 does not have a recorded score for. In the two shared tests (OpenCL and Vulkan), the FirePro W5100 wins both.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient?

A: The Radeon Pro 455 has a 35 W TDP versus the FirePro W5100’s 50 W TDP, making it the more power-efficient option.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: The FirePro W5100 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon Pro 455 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 81.28 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card supports FP16 computations?

A: The Radeon Pro 455 supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio (1,313.3 GFLOPS). The FirePro W5100 does not list FP16 support in its specifications.

Q: Are these cards still in production?

A: Both cards are end-of-life. The FirePro W5100 was released in 2014 and the Radeon Pro 455 in 2016.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are unambiguous: the FirePro W5100 wins both shared tests, and it wins them by comfortable margins.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the FirePro W5100 scores 11,888 against the Radeon Pro 455’s 10,336. That is a 15% delta. This is the larger of the two wins and aligns with the FirePro W5100’s hardware advantages: 96.00 GB/s of memory bandwidth versus 81.28 GB/s, a 14.88 GPixel/s pixel rate versus 13.68 GPixel/s, and a 44.64 GTexel/s texture rate versus 41.04 GTexel/s. The FirePro W5100 also has double the memory capacity (4 GB versus 2 GB), which can reduce data swapping in memory-intensive OpenCL workloads. The 15% lead in OpenCL is notable because both cards share the same shading unit count (768), TMU count (48), and ROP count (16) — the difference comes down to clocks, bandwidth, and interface width.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the FirePro W5100 scores 13,805 versus 12,240 for the Radeon Pro 455 — a 12.8% delta. This is a slightly smaller margin than OpenCL but still a clear victory. The Vulkan result is interesting because the Radeon Pro 455 supports a newer Vulkan revision (1.3 versus 1.2.170), yet the older FirePro W5100 still outperforms it. This suggests that the FirePro W5100’s higher memory clock (1500 MHz versus 1270 MHz) and wider PCIe interface (x16 versus x8) provide tangible benefits in Vulkan compute workloads that outweigh the newer API support on the Radeon Pro 455.

The Radeon Pro 455’s only benchmark win comes in Geekbench Metal, where it scores 15,916. This is the highest single score across all tests for either card, surpassing the FirePro W5100’s best result (13,805 in Vulkan) by 15.3%. However, since the FirePro W5100 has no recorded Metal score, this is not a head-to-head comparison — it is a statement of the Radeon Pro 455’s strength in Apple’s API. The Radeon Pro 455’s Metal performance is likely a key reason it was positioned in the Radeon Pro Mac (400 Series) generation.

Looking at the nearest rivals for context, the FirePro W5100’s average score of 12,847 places it 0.1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 (12,830) and 0.1% ahead of the Radeon Pro 455 (12,831). It trails the AMD Radeon 740M (12,870) by 0.2% and leads the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 (12,773) by 0.6%. The Radeon Pro 455’s average score of 12,831 puts it 0.1% behind the FirePro W5100, dead even with the GTX 590 (12,830), 0.3% behind the Radeon 740M, and 0.5% ahead of the GTX 670. Both cards sit at the 52nd percentile of all GPUs, confirming they are mid-pack performers.

The wins tally tells the story: the FirePro W5100 has 2 head-to-head wins and 0 losses, while the Radeon Pro 455 has 0 wins and 2 losses in shared tests. But the Radeon Pro 455’s Metal score and lower power draw make it the better fit for portable Mac systems, while the FirePro W5100’s desktop-oriented design with four DisplayPort outputs and a 250 W suggested PSU makes it the choice for fixed workstation builds. The data supports both picks — the question is which environment the card will live in.