AMD FirePro W5000 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data clearly favors the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A for raw compute performance. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark in the database, Geekbench OpenCL, with a score of 11998 against the AMD FirePro W5000's 9803. That is a 22.4% advantage, a decisive margin that places the GTX 960A in a higher performance tier entirely.

The GTX 960A also sits at the 51st percentile among all GPUs, while the FirePro W5000 sits at the 47th percentile. For users whose priority is OpenCL compute throughput, the NVIDIA card is the clear choice. The GTX 960A's score even places it within 0.3% of a GeForce GTX 1080, which is remarkable context for a mobile MXM module. It matches or exceeds the 11842 score of an AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT and the 11680 of a GeForce GTX 1660.

The AMD FirePro W5000, however, is not without merit. It offers a larger memory bus, more shading units, more texture mapping units, more ROPs, and a higher pixel rate. For workloads that depend heavily on those specific hardware resources, the FirePro W5000 may hold an advantage that the single OpenCL test does not capture. It also carries a 250 W suggested PSU rating, meaning it can be paired with a modest power supply, and it has a single-slot form factor with explicit display outputs. The GTX 960A, by contrast, is an MXM module with power connectors listed as none and display outputs described as portable device dependent.

For the user who needs maximum OpenCL compute in a compact MXM form factor, the GTX 960A is the answer. For the user who needs a single-slot workstation card with standard display outputs and a broader memory interface, the FirePro W5000 is the more practical workstation tool. The data does not support calling the FirePro W5000 the faster card, but it does support calling it the more flexible card for certain professional setups.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A uses the GM107 chip built on the Maxwell architecture, part of the GeForce 900A generation. The AMD FirePro W5000 uses the Pitcairn chip built on GCN 1.0, part of the FirePro GCN (Wx000) generation. Both are fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but they diverge in transistor counts and die size.

The GTX 960A packs 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.6 million per mm². The FirePro W5000 packs 2,800 million transistors on a 212 mm² die, giving a higher density of 13.2 million per mm². The AMD chip is physically larger and has roughly 50% more transistors, yet it delivers lower OpenCL performance in the recorded benchmark.

The memory subsystems differ significantly. The GTX 960A uses a 128 bit memory bus with 2 GB of GDDR5 running at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective), yielding 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro W5000 uses a 256 bit bus with 2 GB of GDDR5 running at 800 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective), yielding 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro W5000 has 27.7% more memory bandwidth, a hardware advantage that does not translate into a win in the recorded OpenCL test.

The compute resources are also distributed differently. The GTX 960A has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The FirePro W5000 has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The AMD card has more of every execution resource, yet its FP32 output is lower: 1,267.2 GFLOPS versus 1.505 TFLOPS for the NVIDIA card. The FirePro W5000 does win on pixel rate (26.40 GPixel/s versus 18.82 GPixel/s) but loses on texture rate (39.60 GTexel/s versus 47.04 GTexel/s).

API support shows minor differences. The GTX 960A supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The FirePro W5000 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA card has a newer Vulkan version, while the AMD card has a slightly newer DirectX feature level.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the GTX 960A wins it outright. The NVIDIA card scores 11998, while the AMD FirePro W5000 scores 9803. The delta is 22.4% in favor of the GTX 960A. This is a substantial gap, not a marginal one. It places the two cards in different performance classes despite both being end-of-life products.

Context from the nearest rivals reinforces the strength of the GTX 960A result. Its 11998 score is 0.3% above a GeForce GTX 1080 (11960), 1.3% above a Radeon RX 6500 XT (11842), and 2.7% above a GeForce GTX 1660 (11680). The FirePro W5000's 9803 score is 0.2% above a GeForce GTX 1070 (9780) and 0.8% above a Tesla M10 (9724), but 0.3% below a Quadro M2000M (9832) and 0.4% below a Quadro 6000 (9846). In other words, the GTX 960A competes with much more modern desktop GPUs, while the FirePro W5000 sits close to older or lower-tier workstation parts.

The magnitude of the win matters. A 22.4% lead in OpenCL means the GTX 960A will complete compute workloads in roughly 82% of the time the FirePro W5000 requires, assuming the workload scales linearly with the benchmark score. That is a meaningful productivity gain for any application that uses OpenCL for GPGPU tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A scores 11998 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD FirePro W5000 scores 9803. The GTX 960A leads by 22.4%.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD FirePro W5000 has 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth thanks to its 256 bit bus, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A has 80.19 GB/s from a 128 bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A delivers 1.505 TFLOPS, while the AMD FirePro W5000 delivers 1,267.2 GFLOPS.

Q: Do both cards use the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes, both are fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The GTX 960A has a 148 mm² die with 1,870 million transistors; the FirePro W5000 has a 212 mm² die with 2,800 million transistors.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: Both cards are rated at 75 W TDP and use no power connectors. The FirePro W5000 has a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the GTX 960A has no suggested PSU listed.

Q: Which card supports a newer Vulkan version?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A supports Vulkan 1.4, while the AMD FirePro W5000 supports Vulkan 1.2.170.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A wins in every metric that the recorded benchmark captures. It leads in Geekbench OpenCL by 22.4%, in FP32 compute by a clear margin (1.505 TFLOPS versus 1,267.2 GFLOPS), and in texture rate (47.04 GTexel/s versus 39.60 GTexel/s). It also supports a newer Vulkan version (1.4 versus 1.2.170). For OpenCL-heavy workloads, GPU compute tasks, and applications that rely on texture throughput, the GTX 960A is the stronger choice. Its MXM form factor makes it suitable for mobile workstations or compact systems that accept MXM-B modules.

The AMD FirePro W5000 wins on hardware resources that the benchmark does not directly test. It has 768 shading units versus 640, 48 TMUs versus 40, and 32 ROPs versus 16. Its pixel rate is 26.40 GPixel/s versus 18.82 GPixel/s. Its memory bandwidth is 102.4 GB/s versus 80.19 GB/s. These resources matter for pixel-heavy rendering, rasterization workloads, and applications that benefit from a wider memory bus. The FirePro W5000 also has a single-slot form factor, a 250 W suggested PSU, and standard display outputs (1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2), making it easier to integrate into a conventional desktop workstation. The GTX 960A's display outputs are listed as portable device dependent, which limits its usefulness as a desktop display card.

The FirePro W5000's nearest rivals include workstation-class cards like the Quadro M2000M and Quadro 6000, with deltas of only 0.3% and 0.4%, respectively. Its performance profile is consistent with a professional workstation part. The GTX 960A, by contrast, sits alongside consumer gaming GPUs like the GTX 1080 and RX 6500 XT, indicating its compute performance is unusually high for its class.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two cards differ.

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A | AMD FirePro W5000 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | GM107 | Pitcairn |

| Architecture | Maxwell | GCN 1.0 |

| Generation | GeForce 900A | FirePro GCN (Wx000) |

| Transistors | 1,870 million | 2,800 million |

| Die Size | 148 mm² | 212 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.6M / mm² | 13.2M / mm² |

| Memory Clock | 1253 MHz, 5 Gbps effective | 800 MHz, 3.2 Gbps effective |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 80.19 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 640 | 768 |

| TMUs | 40 | 48 |

| ROPs | 16 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 18.82 GPixel/s | 26.40 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 47.04 GTexel/s | 39.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1.505 TFLOPS | 1,267.2 GFLOPS |

| Base Clock | 1097 MHz | Not listed |

| Boost Clock | 1176 MHz | Not listed |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Single-slot |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort 1.2 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_0) | 12 (11_1) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.2.170 |

| Dimensions | Not listed | 183 mm, 7.2 inches length; 111 mm, 4.4 inches height |

| Release Date | 2015-03-12 | 2012-08-06 |

| Predecessor | GeForce 800A | FirePro Terascale |

| Successor | Not listed | Radeon Pro Polaris |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | 599 USD |

The release dates reveal a significant generation gap. The GTX 960A launched in March 2015, nearly three years after the FirePro W5000's August 2012 debut. The FirePro W5000 has a successor (Radeon Pro Polaris), while the GTX 960A does not. Both are end-of-life products, but the GTX 960A's newer architecture and superior OpenCL score make it the more capable compute part in the recorded data.