GPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data provides two direct comparisons between the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 and the AMD FirePro W5100, and in both instances the NVIDIA card takes a clear lead. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 950 scores 15,662 points against the FirePro W5100's 11,888 points, yielding a 31.7% advantage. This is a substantial margin, placing the GTX 950 firmly ahead in general-purpose compute workloads that leverage OpenCL. The Vulkan results tell a similar story, with the GTX 950 posting 16,734 points versus 13,805 for the FirePro W5100, a 21.2% difference. While the Vulkan gap is narrower than the OpenCL gap, it still represents a decisive win for NVIDIA.

Looking at the broader context, the GTX 950's average benchmark score of 13,189 places it at the 53rd percentile of all GPUs, which is only slightly above the FirePro W5100's 52nd percentile and 12,847 average score. The two cards are separated by just 342 points in average terms, a 2.7% difference, despite the much larger deltas in the individual head-to-head tests. This discrepancy suggests that the GTX 950's wins are concentrated in the specific workloads tested (OpenCL and Vulkan), while other untested metrics might narrow the overall gap. Still, when the two are compared directly on the same benchmarks, the GTX 950 wins both, with no test favoring the FirePro W5100.

The nearest rival data for each card reinforces the positioning. The GTX 950 sits between the AMD Radeon Pro 555X (average score 13,321, 1% higher) and the NVIDIA Tesla M2090 (average score 13,075, 0.9% lower), showing it is competitive with mid-range workstation and consumer cards from its era. The FirePro W5100, meanwhile, is bracketed by the AMD Radeon 740M (12,870, 0.2% higher) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 (12,773, 0.6% lower), placing it in a similar performance tier. Both cards are within roughly 1% of their immediate rivals, indicating that neither is an outlier in its respective segment.

The Verdict

From the data, the choice is straightforward for compute-heavy tasks: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 outperforms the AMD FirePro W5100 in every head-to-head benchmark recorded. The GTX 950 is 31.7% faster in OpenCL and 21.2% faster in Vulkan, which are substantial margins that would translate to noticeable real-world differences in applications that rely on these APIs. For users running OpenCL-based rendering, simulation, or data processing, the GTX 950 is the clear pick.

However, the FirePro W5100 is not without its merits. It offers double the memory capacity at 4 GB versus 2 GB, which matters for workloads that exceed the GTX 950's frame buffer. Additionally, the FirePro W5100's 50 W TDP is nearly half the GTX 950's 90 W, making it a far more power-efficient option. The FirePro W5100 also comes in a single-slot form factor with no external power connectors, which simplifies installation in compact or densely populated systems. The GTX 950 requires a dual-slot footprint and a 6-pin power connector.

The decision hinges on priorities. If raw compute performance in OpenCL and Vulkan is the primary concern, the GTX 950 wins decisively. If power draw, memory capacity, and physical footprint matter more, the FirePro W5100 becomes the rational choice, accepting a 21-32% performance deficit in exchange for those advantages. Both cards are end-of-life products, so availability and driver support should be verified before purchase, but the benchmark data itself is unambiguous about the performance hierarchy.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on the same 28 nm TSMC process node, but they employ fundamentally different GPU architectures. The GTX 950 uses the GM206 chip based on NVIDIA's Maxwell 2.0 architecture, part of the GeForce 900 generation. Maxwell 2.0 introduced features like improved color compression and better geometry processing compared to its predecessor. The chip contains 2,940 million transistors on a 228 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.9 million transistors per mm².

The FirePro W5100, in contrast, is built on the Bonaire chip using AMD's GCN 2.0 architecture, part of the FirePro GCN (Wx100) generation. GCN 2.0 was designed for compute-heavy workloads with a focus on asynchronous compute and improved resource utilization. The Bonaire die is smaller at 160 mm² but packs 2,080 million transistors, giving it a slightly higher transistor density of 13.0 million per mm². The smaller die and lower transistor count explain the FirePro W5100's significantly lower 50 W TDP.

Both cards share the same shading unit count (768) and texture mapping unit count (48), but they diverge on render output units. The GTX 950 has 32 ROPs, double the FirePro W5100's 16 ROPs. This difference is reflected in the pixel rate: the GTX 950 achieves 38.02 GPixel/s versus 14.88 GPixel/s for the FirePro W5100, a 2.6x advantage for NVIDIA. The texture rates also favor the GTX 950 at 57.02 GTexel/s against 44.64 GTexel/s, a 27.7% gap. In terms of raw FP32 throughput, the GTX 950 delivers 1.825 TFLOPS, which is 27.8% higher than the FirePro W5100's 1,428.5 GFLOPS.

Memory configurations differ as well. The GTX 950 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, achieving 105.8 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro W5100 also uses GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus but doubles the capacity to 4 GB, while its bandwidth is slightly lower at 96.00 GB/s due to the 1500 MHz memory clock versus the GTX 950's 1653 MHz. The GTX 950 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the FirePro W5100 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170, giving NVIDIA a slight API version advantage. Both cards offer OpenGL 4.6 and PCIe 3.0 x16 connectivity.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 scores 15,662 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 31.7% higher than the AMD FirePro W5100's 11,888.

Q: Does the FirePro W5100 have any advantage in memory capacity?

A: Yes, the FirePro W5100 comes with 4 GB of GDDR5, while the GTX 950 has only 2 GB. This could be decisive for workloads that need more than 2 GB of frame buffer.

Q: What are the power consumption figures for these two cards?

A: The GTX 950 has a TDP of 90 W and requires a 6-pin power connector, while the FirePro W5100 has a TDP of 50 W and requires no external power connectors.

Q: How do these cards compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The GTX 950 achieves 16,734 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 21.2% ahead of the FirePro W5100's 13,805.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The GTX 950 has a pixel rate of 38.02 GPixel/s, which is significantly higher than the FirePro W5100's 14.88 GPixel/s, due to the GTX 950's 32 ROPs versus the FirePro's 16 ROPs.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No, both the GTX 950 and the FirePro W5100 are listed as end-of-life products.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 is the clear winner in raw compute performance. It leads in both OpenCL and Vulkan benchmarks, with margins of 31.7% and 21.2% respectively. The GTX 950 also excels in pixel throughput (38.02 vs 14.88 GPixel/s) and texture rate (57.02 vs 44.64 GTexel/s), making it better suited for graphics-intensive tasks that stress these subsystems. Its higher FP32 throughput (1.825 TFLOPS vs 1,428.5 GFLOPS) further cements its position for general-purpose compute. The GTX 950 also supports more recent API versions, including DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, which may matter for compatibility with newer applications.

The AMD FirePro W5100 wins on efficiency and capacity. Its 50 W TDP is 44% lower than the GTX 950's 90 W, making it a far more power-conscious choice for systems with limited thermal headroom. The single-slot design and lack of power connectors make it easier to install in compact chassis or alongside other expansion cards. The 4 GB memory capacity is double that of the GTX 950, which is a decisive advantage for workloads that require large datasets or high-resolution textures that exceed 2 GB. While its memory bandwidth is slightly lower (96.00 vs 105.8 GB/s), the extra capacity can compensate in memory-bound scenarios.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ on several key specifications:

• Chip: GTX 950 uses GM206 (Maxwell 2.0); FirePro W5100 uses Bonaire (GCN 2.0).
• Transistors: GTX 950 has 2,940 million; FirePro W5100 has 2,080 million.
• Die Size: GTX 950 is 228 mm²; FirePro W5100 is 160 mm².
• Transistor Density: GTX 950 is 12.9M/mm²; FirePro W5100 is 13.0M/mm².
• Memory Size: GTX 950 has 2 GB; FirePro W5100 has 4 GB.
• Memory Clock: GTX 950 runs at 1653 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective); FirePro W5100 at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective).
• Memory Bandwidth: GTX 950 achieves 105.8 GB/s; FirePro W5100 achieves 96.00 GB/s.
• ROPs: GTX 950 has 32; FirePro W5100 has 16.
• Pixel Rate: GTX 950 is 38.02 GPixel/s; FirePro W5100 is 14.88 GPixel/s.
• Texture Rate: GTX 950 is 57.02 GTexel/s; FirePro W5100 is 44.64 GTexel/s.
• FP32: GTX 950 is 1.825 TFLOPS; FirePro W5100 is 1,428.5 GFLOPS.
• TDP: GTX 950 is 90 W; FirePro W5100 is 50 W.
• Slot Width: GTX 950 is dual-slot; FirePro W5100 is single-slot.
• Power Connectors: GTX 950 requires 1x 6-pin; FirePro W5100 requires none.
• Display Outputs: GTX 950 has 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2; FirePro W5100 has 4x DisplayPort 1.2.
• DirectX Support: GTX 950 supports 12 (12_1); FirePro W5100 supports 12 (12_0).
• Vulkan Support: GTX 950 supports 1.4; FirePro W5100 supports 1.2.170.
• Dimensions: GTX 950 is 202 mm long; FirePro W5100 is 173 mm long and 111 mm high.
• Release Date: GTX 950 launched on 2015-08-19; FirePro W5100 on 2014-03-30.
• Launch MSRP: GTX 950 had a launch MSRP of 159 USD; FirePro W5100 had no MSRP listed.