GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile vs FirePro W5100
Aggregate performance score
We've compared FirePro W5100 with GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile, including specs and performance data.
RTX 2050 Mobile outperforms W5100 by a whopping 139% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 601 | 360 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 53 |
| Power efficiency | 11.22 | 29.74 |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 (2013−2017) | Ampere (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | Bonaire | GA107 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 31 March 2014 (12 years ago) | 17 December 2021 (4 years ago) |
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 cores | 768 | 2048 |
| Core clock speed | 930 MHz | 735 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1245 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 2,080 million | 8.7 billion |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 30 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 44.64 | 79.68 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.428 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 16 | 32 |
| TMUs | 48 | 64 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 64 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 16 |
| L1 Cache | 192 KB | 1 MB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 1024 KB |
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).
| Laptop size | no data | large |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Length | 171 mm | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | no data |
| Form factor | full height / half length | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no data |
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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1500 MHz | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 96 GB/s | 112.0 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 Connectors | 4x DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a |
| HDMI | - | + |
| G-SYNC support | - | + |
| StereoOutput3D | + | - |
| DisplayPort count | 4 | no data |
| Dual-link DVI support | + | - |
| HD сomponent video output | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| VR Ready | no data | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | 6.9 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.4 |
| CUDA | - | 8.6 |
| DLSS | - | + |
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 HD | 16−18 | 42
+163%
|
| 1440p | 12−14 | 32
+167%
|
| 4K | 10−12 | 28
+180%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Atomic Heart | 45−50 | 45−50 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 74 | 74 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 47 | 47 |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 25 | 25 |
Full HD
Medium
| Atomic Heart | 49 | 49 |
| Battlefield 5 | 70−75 | 70−75 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 67 | 67 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 42 | 42 |
| Far Cry 5 | 59 | 59 |
| Fortnite | 95−100 | 95−100 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 70−75 | 70−75 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 65−70 | 65−70 |
| Valorant | 130−140 | 130−140 |
Full HD
High
| Atomic Heart | 30 | 30 |
| Battlefield 5 | 70−75 | 70−75 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40 | 40 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 210−220 | 210−220 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 29 | 29 |
| Dota 2 | 118 | 118 |
| Far Cry 5 | 53 | 53 |
| Fortnite | 95−100 | 95−100 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 70−75 | 70−75 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 68 | 68 |
| Metro Exodus | 35−40 | 35−40 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 65−70 | 65−70 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 58 | 58 |
| Valorant | 130−140 | 130−140 |
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 70−75 | 70−75 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 25 | 25 |
| Dota 2 | 110 | 110 |
| Far Cry 5 | 49 | 49 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 70−75 | 70−75 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 65−70 | 65−70 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 33 | 33 |
| Valorant | 130−140 | 130−140 |
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 95−100 | 95−100 |
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 35−40 | 35−40 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 120−130 | 120−130 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 37 | 37 |
| Metro Exodus | 21−24 | 21−24 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 160−170 | 160−170 |
| Valorant | 150−160 | 150−160 |
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55 | 50−55 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18 | 16−18 |
| Far Cry 5 | 37 | 37 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45 | 40−45 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27 | 24−27 |
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 40−45 | 40−45 |
4K
High
| Atomic Heart | 14−16 | 14−16 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16 | 14−16 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 30−35 | 30−35 |
| Metro Exodus | 14−16 | 14−16 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27 | 24−27 |
| Valorant | 90−95 | 90−95 |
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27 | 24−27 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16 | 14−16 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8 | 7−8 |
| Dota 2 | 34 | 34 |
| Far Cry 5 | 18 | 18 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−35 | 30−35 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18 | 16−18 |
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 18−20 | 18−20 |
This is how FirePro W5100 and RTX 2050 Mobile compete in popular games:
- RTX 2050 Mobile is 163% faster in 1080p
- RTX 2050 Mobile is 167% faster in 1440p
- RTX 2050 Mobile is 180% faster in 4K
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 7.20 | 17.19 |
| Recency | 31 March 2014 | 17 December 2021 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 30 Watt |
RTX 2050 Mobile has a 139% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 71% more advanced lithography process, and 40% lower power consumption.
The GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro W5100 in performance tests.
Be aware that FirePro W5100 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
