
FirePro W5100 vs GRID M10-4Q

FirePro W5100
Popular choices:

GRID M10-4Q
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 W5100 is positioned at rank 166 and the GRID M10-4Q is on rank 344, so the FirePro W5100 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar FirePro W5100
Performance Per Dollar GRID M10-4Q
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FirePro W5100 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.3% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (4 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GRID M10-4Q.
| Insight | FirePro W5100 | GRID M10-4Q |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.3%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The FirePro W5100 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the FirePro W5100 holds the technical lead. Priced at $50 (vs $340), it costs 85% less, resulting in a 582.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | FirePro W5100 | GRID M10-4Q |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+582.3%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($50) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($340) |
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 W5100 and GRID M10-4Q

FirePro W5100
The FirePro W5100 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 31 2014. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 930 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,987 points.

GRID M10-4Q
The GRID M10-4Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 18 2016. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1033 MHz to 1306 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,977 points.
Graphics Performance
The FirePro W5100 scores 2,987 and the GRID M10-4Q reaches 2,977 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FirePro W5100 is built on GCN 2.0 while the GRID M10-4Q uses Maxwell, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 768 (FirePro W5100) vs 640 (GRID M10-4Q). Raw compute: 1.428 TFLOPS (FirePro W5100) vs 1.672 TFLOPS (GRID M10-4Q).
| Feature | FirePro W5100 | GRID M10-4Q |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,987 | 2,977 |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 768+20% | 640 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.428 TFLOPS | 1.672 TFLOPS+17% |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 48+20% | 40 |
| L1 Cache | 192 KB | 320 KB+67% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FirePro W5100 | GRID M10-4Q |
|---|---|---|
| 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 W5100 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GRID M10-4Q has 2 GB. The FirePro W5100 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (FirePro W5100) vs 2 MB (GRID M10-4Q) — the GRID M10-4Q has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | FirePro W5100 | GRID M10-4Q |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+100% | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Power & Dimensions
The FirePro W5100 draws 50W versus the GRID M10-4Q's 225W — a 127.3% difference. The FirePro W5100 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro W5100) vs 350W (GRID M10-4Q). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | FirePro W5100 | GRID M10-4Q |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W-78% | 225W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 173mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 59.7+352% | 13.2 |
Value Analysis
The FirePro W5100 launched at $399 MSRP and currently averages $50, while the GRID M10-4Q launched at $2805 and now averages $340. The FirePro W5100 costs 85.3% less ($290 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 59.7 (FirePro W5100) vs 8.8 (GRID M10-4Q) — the FirePro W5100 offers 578.4% better value. The GRID M10-4Q is the newer GPU (2016 vs 2014).
| Feature | FirePro W5100 | GRID M10-4Q |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $399-86% | $2805 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $50-85% | $340 |
| Performance per Dollar | 59.7+578% | 8.8 |
| Codename | Bonaire | GM107 |
| Release | March 31 2014 | May 18 2016 |
| Ranking | #582 | #622 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












