
FirePro W5100 vs Quadro K1200

FirePro W5100
Popular choices:

Quadro K1200
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 Quadro K1200 is on rank 142, so the Quadro K1200 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 Quadro K1200
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FirePro W5100 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.7% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro K1200.
| Insight | FirePro W5100 | Quadro K1200 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.7%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| 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 $184), it costs 73% less, resulting in a 270.7% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | FirePro W5100 | Quadro K1200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+270.7%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($50) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($184) |
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 Quadro K1200

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.

Quadro K1200
The Quadro K1200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 28 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 954 MHz to 1033 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 45W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,965 points. Launch price was $321.97.
Graphics Performance
The FirePro W5100 scores 2,987 and the Quadro K1200 reaches 2,965 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FirePro W5100 is built on GCN 2.0 while the Quadro K1200 uses Maxwell, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 768 (FirePro W5100) vs 512 (Quadro K1200). Raw compute: 1.428 TFLOPS (FirePro W5100) vs 1.0578 TFLOPS (Quadro K1200).
| Feature | FirePro W5100 | Quadro K1200 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,987 | 2,965 |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 768+50% | 512 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.428 TFLOPS+35% | 1.0578 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 48+50% | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 192 KB | 256 KB+33% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FirePro W5100 | Quadro K1200 |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (FirePro W5100) vs 2 MB (Quadro K1200) — the Quadro K1200 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | FirePro W5100 | Quadro K1200 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 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 Quadro K1200's 45W — a 10.5% difference. The Quadro K1200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro W5100) vs 350W (Quadro K1200). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | FirePro W5100 | Quadro K1200 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W | 45W-10% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 173mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 59.7 | 65.9+10% |
Value Analysis
The FirePro W5100 launched at $399 MSRP and currently averages $50, while the Quadro K1200 launched at $300 and now averages $184. The FirePro W5100 costs 72.8% less ($134 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 59.7 (FirePro W5100) vs 16.1 (Quadro K1200) — the FirePro W5100 offers 270.8% better value. The Quadro K1200 is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2014).
| Feature | FirePro W5100 | Quadro K1200 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $399 | $300-25% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $50-73% | $184 |
| Performance per Dollar | 59.7+271% | 16.1 |
| Codename | Bonaire | GM107 |
| Release | March 31 2014 | January 28 2015 |
| Ranking | #582 | #586 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.















