Arc A750 vs FirePro W5100

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro W5100 with Arc A750, including specs and performance data.

FirePro W5100
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 50 Watt
7.19

A750 outperforms W5100 by a whopping 319% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking604217
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data47.95
Power efficiency11.2110.45
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameBonaireDG2-512
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date31 March 2014 (12 years ago)12 October 2022 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$289

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores7683584
Core clock speed930 MHz2050 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2400 MHz
Number of transistors2,080 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate44.64537.6
Floating-point processing power1.428 TFLOPS17.2 TFLOPS
ROPs16112
TMUs48224
Tensor Coresno data448
Ray Tracing Coresno data28
L1 Cache192 KBno data
L2 Cache256 KB16 MB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length171 mmno data
Width1-slot2-slot
Form factorfull height / half lengthno data
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth96 GB/s512.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors4x DisplayPort1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI-+
StereoOutput3D+-
DisplayPort count4no data
Dual-link DVI support+-
HD сomponent video output+-

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.36.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
DLSS-+

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

FirePro W5100 7.19
Arc A750 30.15
+319%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

FirePro W5100 3014
Samples: 420
Arc A750 12639
+319%
Samples: 1928

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD24−27
−77.6%
107
1440p14−1660
+329%
4K8−9
−77.8%
36

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.70
1440pno data4.82
4Kno data8.03

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 336 336
Cyberpunk 2077 75 75
Hogwarts Legacy 111 111
Resident Evil 4 Remake 151 151

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 110−120 110−120
Counter-Strike 2 270 270
Cyberpunk 2077 66 66
Far Cry 5 111 111
Fortnite 140−150 140−150
Forza Horizon 4 112 112
Hogwarts Legacy 85 85
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130 120−130
Valorant 190−200 190−200

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 110−120 110−120
Counter-Strike 2 144 144
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 58 58
Far Cry 5 102 102
Fortnite 140−150 140−150
Forza Horizon 4 106 106
Grand Theft Auto V 99 99
Hogwarts Legacy 68 68
Metro Exodus 105 105
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130 120−130
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 185 185
Valorant 190−200 190−200

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 110−120 110−120
Cyberpunk 2077 55 55
Far Cry 5 98 98
Forza Horizon 4 90 90
Hogwarts Legacy 55 55
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130 120−130
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 69 69
Valorant 190−200 190−200

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 140−150 140−150

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 89 89
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220 210−220
Grand Theft Auto V 41 41
Metro Exodus 65 65
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 220−230 220−230

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 80−85 80−85
Cyberpunk 2077 42 42
Far Cry 5 76 76
Forza Horizon 4 79 79
Hogwarts Legacy 42 42
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 57 57

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 75−80 75−80

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 20 20
Grand Theft Auto V 45 45
Hogwarts Legacy 20−22 20−22
Metro Exodus 43 43
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 69 69
Valorant 180−190 180−190

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 45−50 45−50
Counter-Strike 2 30−35 30−35
Cyberpunk 2077 23 23
Far Cry 5 45 45
Forza Horizon 4 61 61
Hogwarts Legacy 23 23
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40 35−40

4K
Epic

Fortnite 35−40 35−40

This is how FirePro W5100 and Arc A750 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A750 is 346% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A750 is 329% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A750 is 350% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.19 30.15
Recency 31 March 2014 12 October 2022
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 225 Watt

FirePro W5100 has 78% lower power consumption.

Arc A750, on the other hand, has a 319% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 79% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A750 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro W5100 in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro W5100 is a workstation graphics card while Arc A750 is a desktop one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.6 126 votes

Rate FirePro W5100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 1080 votes

Rate Arc A750 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro W5100 or Arc A750, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.