FirePro R5000 vs Radeon R5 M330

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R5 M330 with FirePro R5000, including specs and performance data.

R5 M330
2015
4 GB DDR3, 18 Watt
1.35

R5000 outperforms R5 M330 by a whopping 343% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1028615
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.26
Power efficiency6.063.22
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code nameExoPitcairn
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date5 May 2015 (10 years ago)25 February 2013 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$1,099

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores320768
Compute units5no data
Core clock speed955 MHz825 MHz
Boost clock speed1030 MHzno data
Number of transistors690 million2,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt350 Watt
Texture fill rate20.6039.60
Floating-point processing power0.6592 TFLOPS1.267 TFLOPS
ROPs832
TMUs2048
L1 Cache80 KB192 KB
L2 Cache128 KB512 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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0PCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data279 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Form factorno datafull height / full length
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-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 typeDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s102.4 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 ConnectorsNo outputs2x mini-DisplayPort
Dual-link DVI support-+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

HD3D+-
PowerTune+-
DualGraphics+-
ZeroCore+-
Switchable graphics+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_1)
Shader Model5.05.1
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCLNot Listed1.2
Vulkan+1.2.131
Mantle+-

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.

R5 M330 1.35
FirePro R5000 5.98
+343%

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.

R5 M330 595
Samples: 133
FirePro R5000 2646
+345%
Samples: 1

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 HD9
−289%
35−40
+289%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data31.40

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
−300%
24−27
+300%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
Fortnite 5−6
−320%
21−24
+320%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−338%
35−40
+338%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
−300%
24−27
+300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
−300%
40−45
+300%
Valorant 35−40
−329%
150−160
+329%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
−338%
140−150
+338%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
Dota 2 18−20
−317%
75−80
+317%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
Fortnite 5−6
−320%
21−24
+320%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−338%
35−40
+338%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
−300%
24−27
+300%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
−300%
40−45
+300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−329%
30−33
+329%
Valorant 35−40
−329%
150−160
+329%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
Dota 2 18−20
−317%
75−80
+317%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−338%
35−40
+338%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
−300%
24−27
+300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
−300%
40−45
+300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−329%
30−33
+329%
Valorant 35−40
−329%
150−160
+329%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
−320%
21−24
+320%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
−300%
16−18
+300%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 9−10
−289%
35−40
+289%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
−329%
60−65
+329%
Valorant 7−8
−329%
30−33
+329%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−300%
16−18
+300%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−333%
65−70
+333%
Valorant 7−8
−329%
30−33
+329%

4K
Ultra

Dota 2 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%

This is how R5 M330 and FirePro R5000 compete in popular games:

  • FirePro R5000 is 289% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.35 5.98
Recency 5 May 2015 25 February 2013
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 350 Watt

R5 M330 has an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 1844.4% lower power consumption.

FirePro R5000, on the other hand, has a 343% higher aggregate performance score.

The FirePro R5000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R5 M330 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R5 M330 is a notebook graphics card while FirePro R5000 is a workstation one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon R5 M330
Radeon R5 M330
AMD FirePro R5000
FirePro R5000

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.


2.9 1177 votes

Rate Radeon R5 M330 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 3 votes

Rate FirePro R5000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R5 M330 or FirePro R5000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.