AMD FirePro M6100 vs AMD Radeon Pro 555 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro 555 and AMD FirePro M6100 are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions from AMD, but they represent two distinct generations of GPU architecture and design philosophy. The Radeon Pro 555, built on the Polaris 21 chip, utilizes the newer GCN 4.0 architecture and a 14 nm process, while the FirePro M6100 relies on the older GCN 2.0 architecture with an Emerald chip fabricated on a 28 nm process. Despite these generational gaps, benchmark data shows they land remarkably close in overall performance, with the FirePro M6100 holding a slight edge in the single available head-to-head test. The Radeon Pro 555 is designed as an integrated graphics processor (IGP) for Apple Mac systems, whereas the FirePro M6100 is a modular MXM-B card, reflecting their different target platforms and upgrade paths.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split between these two GPUs is significant, as they come from different eras of AMD’s design roadmap. The Radeon Pro 555 utilizes the Polaris 21 chip, built on GCN 4.0 architecture, which is a mature iteration of AMD’s Graphics Core Next design. In contrast, the FirePro M6100 uses the Emerald chip, based on the older GCN 2.0 architecture. This generational gap is immediately visible in the manufacturing process: the Radeon Pro 555 is fabricated on a 14 nm node by GlobalFoundries, while the FirePro M6100 uses a 28 nm process from TSMC. The newer process allows the Radeon Pro 555 to pack 3,000 million transistors into a die size of just 123 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 24.4M per mm². The FirePro M6100, by comparison, contains 2,080 million transistors spread across a larger 160 mm² die, yielding a lower density of 13.0M per mm².

The compute resources also differ notably between the two. The FirePro M6100 features 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 raster operation units (ROPs). The Radeon Pro 555, despite its newer architecture, offers fewer of these resources: 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and the same 16 ROPs. This gives the FirePro M6100 a theoretical advantage in raw throughput, which is reflected in its higher pixel rate of 17.60 GPixel/s and texture rate of 61.60 GTexel/s, compared to the Radeon Pro 555’s 13.60 GPixel/s and 40.80 GTexel/s. The floating-point performance tells a similar story, with the FirePro M6100 delivering 1.971 TFLOPS of FP32 compute against the Radeon Pro 555’s 1,305.6 GFLOPS. Notably, the Radeon Pro 555 also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, a feature absent from the FirePro M6100’s specifications.

Memory configurations are similar in capacity and type—both have 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus—but the clocks differ. The Radeon Pro 555 runs its memory at 1275 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective), yielding 81.60 GB/s of bandwidth, while the FirePro M6100 runs at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective), producing a higher 96.00 GB/s. The bus interfaces also diverge: the Radeon Pro 555 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the FirePro M6100 employs an MXM-B (3.0) connector. In terms of API support, both support DirectX 12 (12_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but the Radeon Pro 555 offers Vulkan 1.3, whereas the FirePro M6100 is limited to Vulkan 1.2.170. The Radeon Pro 555 is rated at 75 W TDP with a slot width of IGP, whereas the FirePro M6100’s TDP is not specified, and it comes as an MXM module.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 555 has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 13407, compared to the AMD FirePro M6100’s 13354. This places the Radeon Pro 555 just 0.4% ahead of the FirePro M6100 in the nearestRivals data.

Q: How do the two cards compare in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The AMD FirePro M6100 wins the head-to-head Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 13354, against the Radeon Pro 555’s 11682. This represents a 12.5% advantage for the FirePro M6100.

Q: Are these GPUs from the same architectural generation?

A: No, they are not. The Radeon Pro 555 is based on GCN 4.0 architecture using a 14 nm process, while the FirePro M6100 uses the older GCN 2.0 architecture on a 28 nm process.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The FirePro M6100 has a higher memory bandwidth of 96.00 GB/s, compared to the Radeon Pro 555’s 81.60 GB/s. This is due to the FirePro M6100’s faster memory clock of 1500 MHz versus 1275 MHz.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD FirePro M6100 has more shading units, with 896, while the AMD Radeon Pro 555 has 768. The FirePro M6100 also has more TMUs, 56 versus 48.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same API versions?

A: Both support DirectX 12 (12_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but they differ in Vulkan support. The Radeon Pro 555 supports Vulkan 1.3, while the FirePro M6100 supports Vulkan 1.2.170.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category, reflecting their different architectural generations. The process node stands out as a primary difference: the Radeon Pro 555 is built on a 14 nm process by GlobalFoundries, while the FirePro M6100 uses a 28 nm process from TSMC. Transistor counts follow suit, with the Radeon Pro 555 containing 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, while the FirePro M6100 has 2,080 million transistors on a larger 160 mm² die. The transistor density is nearly double for the Radeon Pro 555 at 24.4M per mm² versus 13.0M per mm².

Compute unit configurations differ, with the Radeon Pro 555 offering 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, while the FirePro M6100 provides 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The clock speeds for the memory also vary, with the Radeon Pro 555 running at 1275 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective) and the FirePro M6100 at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective). This leads to different bandwidth figures: 81.60 GB/s for the Radeon Pro 555 and 96.00 GB/s for the FirePro M6100. The pixel rate and texture rate are higher on the FirePro M6100, at 17.60 GPixel/s and 61.60 GTexel/s respectively, versus 13.60 GPixel/s and 40.80 GTexel/s for the Radeon Pro 555. FP32 compute is also higher on the FirePro M6100 at 1.971 TFLOPS, compared to 1,305.6 GFLOPS for the Radeon Pro 555, which additionally supports FP16 at 1,305.6 GFLOPS.

The TDP is specified for the Radeon Pro 555 at 75 W, while the FirePro M6100 has no TDP listed. The slot width differs, with the Radeon Pro 555 being an IGP and the FirePro M6100 an MXM Module. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x8 for the Radeon Pro 555 and MXM-B (3.0) for the FirePro M6100. In terms of software support, the Radeon Pro 555 supports Vulkan 1.3, while the FirePro M6100 supports Vulkan 1.2.170. The release dates also differ significantly: the Radeon Pro 555 was released in 2017-06-04, while the FirePro M6100 came out earlier in 2014-05-26. The FirePro M6100 has a predecessor named FirePro Mobility and a successor called Radeon Pro Mobile, while the Radeon Pro 555 has no listed predecessor or successor.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available between these two GPUs is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results show a clear winner. The AMD FirePro M6100 scores 13354, while the AMD Radeon Pro 555 scores 11682. This translates to a 12.5% performance advantage for the FirePro M6100 in this compute-heavy workload. The delta of -12.5% is listed for the Radeon Pro 555, indicating it is behind by that margin. This is a substantial difference in a synthetic benchmark that measures general compute performance, suggesting that the FirePro M6100’s higher shading unit count (896 versus 768) and faster memory bandwidth (96.00 GB/s versus 81.60 GB/s) provide a tangible benefit in OpenCL tasks.

However, the overall average benchmark scores tell a more nuanced story. The Radeon Pro 555 has an average benchmark score of 13407, which is higher than the FirePro M6100’s 13354. The difference is a mere 0.4%, placing them in a statistical tie. This indicates that while the FirePro M6100 wins the OpenCL test decisively, the Radeon Pro 555 may perform better in other benchmark suites not included in the head-to-head data, such as Geekbench Metal and Geekbench Vulkan, where it scores 16236 and 12303 respectively. The FirePro M6100 has no scores listed for those tests, so a direct comparison is not possible.

Looking at the nearestRivals data, both GPUs are surrounded by similar-performing parts. The Radeon Pro 555’s closest rival is the AMD Radeon HD 8950M, with an average score of 13376 and a delta of 0.2%, followed by the AMD Radeon RX 5500M at 13356 (0.4% delta) and the AMD FirePro M6100 at 13354 (0.4% delta). The NVIDIA P106-090 is slightly ahead at 13470, with a -0.5% delta. For the FirePro M6100, the AMD Radeon RX 5500M is the closest rival at 13356 (0% delta), followed by the AMD Radeon HD 8950M at 13376 (-0.2% delta), the AMD Radeon Pro 555X at 13321 (0.3% delta), and the AMD Radeon Pro 555 at 13407 (-0.4% delta). These rankings reinforce that both GPUs sit in the 54th percentile of all GPUs, indicating mid-pack performance.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro M6100 wins decisively in the compute-centric Geekbench OpenCL benchmark, where it outperforms the Radeon Pro 555 by 12.5%. This advantage is likely attributable to its higher shading unit count (896 versus 768), greater TMU count (56 versus 48), and superior memory bandwidth (96.00 GB/s versus 81.60 GB/s). For workloads that rely heavily on raw FP32 compute, such as certain scientific simulations, data processing, or OpenCL-accelerated applications, the FirePro M6100 is the stronger choice. Its higher pixel rate (17.60 GPixel/s) and texture rate (61.60 GTexel/s) also suggest it may handle fill-rate-bound tasks more efficiently, despite its older GCN 2.0 architecture.

The AMD Radeon Pro 555 wins in terms of overall average benchmark score, edging out the FirePro M6100 by 0.4% with a score of 13407 versus 13354. This is a narrow margin, but it suggests that the Radeon Pro 555 may perform better in a broader range of tests. Its availability of Geekbench Metal and Vulkan scores (16236 and 12303, respectively) indicates strong performance in graphics APIs that are not tested for the FirePro M6100. The Radeon Pro 555 also benefits from its newer GCN 4.0 architecture and 14 nm process, which offers better transistor density (24.4M per mm² versus 13.0M per mm²) and the ability to run FP16 compute at 1:1 ratio, a feature absent from the FirePro M6100. For users prioritizing Vulkan 1.3 support or who are in the Apple Mac ecosystem (given its IGP slot width and Radeon Pro Mac generation), the Radeon Pro 555 is the more modern and versatile option.

In practical terms, the FirePro M6100 is the better pick for pure OpenCL compute tasks where its 12.5% lead can translate into faster processing times. The Radeon Pro 555, meanwhile, offers a more balanced profile with competitive average scores and support for newer APIs, making it a better fit for general-purpose graphics work and applications that leverage Metal or Vulkan. The data does not suggest a clear overall winner, as the two GPUs trade blows depending on the workload, with the FirePro M6100 leading in compute and the Radeon Pro 555 holding a slight edge in overall averages. Both are end-of-life products, but the choice between them hinges on whether the user’s priority is raw OpenCL throughput or broader API compatibility and modern architecture features.