FirePro M5950 vs FireStream 9270
FirePro M5950
Popular choices:
FireStream 9270
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The FirePro M5950 is positioned at rank 181 and the FireStream 9270 is on rank 359, so the FirePro M5950 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar FirePro M5950
Performance Per Dollar FireStream 9270
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FireStream 9270 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.1% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (2 GB vs 1 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the FirePro M5950.
| Insight | FirePro M5950 | FireStream 9270 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / TeraScale (2005−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The FireStream 9270 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the FireStream 9270 holds the technical lead. Priced at $20 (vs $200), it costs 90% less, resulting in a 920.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | FirePro M5950 | FireStream 9270 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+920.5%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($200) | ✅More affordable ($20) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of FirePro M5950 and FireStream 9270
FirePro M5950
The FirePro M5950 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 4 2011. It features the TeraScale 2 architecture. The core clock speed is 725 MHz. It has 480 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 35W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,314 points.
FireStream 9270
The FireStream 9270 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 13 2008. It features the TeraScale architecture. The core clock speed is 750 MHz. It has 800 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 160W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,341 points.
Graphics Performance
The FirePro M5950 scores 1,314 and the FireStream 9270 reaches 1,341 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FirePro M5950 is built on TeraScale 2 while the FireStream 9270 uses TeraScale, both on 40 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 480 (FirePro M5950) vs 800 (FireStream 9270). Raw compute: 0.696 TFLOPS (FirePro M5950) vs 1.2 TFLOPS (FireStream 9270).
| Feature | FirePro M5950 | FireStream 9270 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,314 | 1,341+2% |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 | TeraScale |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 480 | 800+67% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.696 TFLOPS | 1.2 TFLOPS+72% |
| ROPs | 8 | 16+100% |
| TMUs | 24 | 40+67% |
| L1 Cache | 48 KB | 160 KB+233% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FirePro M5950 | FireStream 9270 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The FirePro M5950 comes with 1 GB of VRAM, while the FireStream 9270 has 2 GB. The FireStream 9270 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | FirePro M5950 | FireStream 9270 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB | 2 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 11.2 (FirePro M5950) vs 10.1 (FireStream 9270). OpenGL: 4.1 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 5 vs 1.
| Feature | FirePro M5950 | FireStream 9270 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 11.2+11% | 10.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.1+24% | 3.3 |
| Max Displays | 5+400% | 1 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (FirePro M5950) vs None (FireStream 9270). Decoder: UVD 3 vs UVD 2.2. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2 (FirePro M5950) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (FireStream 9270).
| Feature | FirePro M5950 | FireStream 9270 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | None |
| Decoder | UVD 3 | UVD 2.2 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The FirePro M5950 draws 35W versus the FireStream 9270's 160W — a 128.2% difference. The FirePro M5950 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro M5950) vs 350W (FireStream 9270). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 241mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 85°C.
| Feature | FirePro M5950 | FireStream 9270 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 35W-78% | 160W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | 241mm |
| Height | 0mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C-12% | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 37.5+346% | 8.4 |
Value Analysis
The FirePro M5950 launched at $200 MSRP and currently averages $200, while the FireStream 9270 launched at $1499 and now averages $20. The FireStream 9270 costs 90% less ($180 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 6.6 (FirePro M5950) vs 67.0 (FireStream 9270) — the FireStream 9270 offers 915.2% better value. The FirePro M5950 is the newer GPU (2011 vs 2008).
| Feature | FirePro M5950 | FireStream 9270 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $200-87% | $1499 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $200 | $20-90% |
| Performance per Dollar | 6.6 | 67.0+915% |
| Codename | Whistler | RV770 |
| Release | January 4 2011 | November 13 2008 |
| Ranking | #795 | #790 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on FirePro M5950 and FireStream 9270
