FirePro W5130M vs Radeon R7 265

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 265 with FirePro W5130M, including specs and performance data.

R7 265
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
10.37
+184%

R7 265 outperforms W5130M by a whopping 184% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking404680
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.720.13
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)GCN (2011−2017)
GPU code namePitcairnTropo
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date13 February 2014 (10 years ago)2 October 2015 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 no data
Current price$242 (1.6x MSRP)$1041

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R7 265 has 1223% better value for money than W5130M.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1024512
Boost clock speed925 MHz925 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 million1,500 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Wattno data
Texture fill rate59.2029.60
Floating-point performance1,894 gflops947.2 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Radeon R7 265 and FirePro W5130M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length210 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1400 MHz4000 MHz
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s64 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity1+
HDMI+no data
DisplayPort support-no data

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration-+
CrossFire1no data
Enduro-no data
FreeSync1no data
HD3D-no data
PowerTune-no data
TrueAudio-no data
ZeroCore-no data
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_1)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkanno data1.2.131
Mantle-no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

R7 265 10.37
+184%
W5130M 3.65

Radeon R7 265 outperforms FirePro W5130M by 184% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

R7 265 5220
+147%
W5130M 2110

Radeon R7 265 outperforms FirePro W5130M by 147% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

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 HD55−60
+175%
20
−175%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+163%
8−9
−163%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+163%
8−9
−163%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+170%
10−11
−170%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+181%
16−18
−181%
Hitman 3 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+162%
21−24
−162%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+167%
9−10
−167%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+150%
14−16
−150%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+178%
18−20
−178%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+163%
8−9
−163%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+163%
8−9
−163%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+170%
10−11
−170%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+181%
16−18
−181%
Hitman 3 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+162%
21−24
−162%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+167%
9−10
−167%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+150%
14−16
−150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+170%
10
−170%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+178%
18−20
−178%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+163%
8−9
−163%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+181%
16−18
−181%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+162%
21−24
−162%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+150%
14−16
−150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+163%
8−9
−163%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+178%
18−20
−178%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+167%
9−10
−167%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+167%
6−7
−167%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+167%
6−7
−167%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+167%
6−7
−167%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+167%
6−7
−167%
Hitman 3 21−24
+163%
8−9
−163%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+167%
9−10
−167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%

This is how R7 265 and W5130M compete in popular games:

  • R7 265 is 175% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.37 3.65
Recency 13 February 2014 2 October 2015
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB

The Radeon R7 265 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro W5130M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 265 is a desktop card while FirePro W5130M is a mobile workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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 R7 265
Radeon R7 265
AMD FirePro W5130M
FirePro W5130M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.1 368 votes

Rate Radeon R7 265 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 68 votes

Rate FirePro W5130M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.