AMD FirePro M4000 vs AMD Radeon HD 8690M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data presents a clear, single-race picture: in the only head-to-head test available, Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon HD 8690M takes the win with a score of 6137 against the AMD FirePro M4000’s 5537. That is a 10.8% advantage for the HD 8690M, and it is the only direct comparison logged in the database. So on the basis of what the measurements show, the HD 8690M wins the one benchmark where both were tested.

But a single test does not tell the whole story, especially when the two cards belong to different product families with different design goals. The Radeon HD 8690M is part of the Solar System generation, specifically the HD 8600M series, and it sits at the 36th percentile among all GPUs in the database. The FirePro M4000, from the FirePro Mobile Mx000 generation, lands at the 32nd percentile. That percentile gap, 36 versus 32, aligns with the OpenCL result: the Radeon is modestly ahead in the aggregate ranking, but not by a wide margin.

The FirePro M4000 does have one clear advantage in the data, and that is in raw hardware resources. It carries 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs, versus the HD 8690M’s 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. In pixel throughput, the FirePro reaches 10.80 GPixel/s compared to the Radeon’s 7.800 GPixel/s. In texture rate, the FirePro posts 21.60 GTexel/s versus 19.50 GTexel/s. Those are meaningful structural differences, but they do not translate into a benchmark victory here. The recorded OpenCL score favors the smaller, lower-spec chip, which suggests that the benchmark workload may not scale with raw shader count or memory bandwidth in a way that benefits the FirePro.

So where does each one win? The HD 8690M wins the only measured benchmark, the overall percentile ranking, and the comparison against its nearest rivals. The FirePro M4000 wins on paper specifications: more shading units, more TMUs, more ROPs, higher pixel rate, higher texture rate, double the memory bus width, and double the bandwidth. It also has a higher FP32 throughput at 691.2 GFLOPS versus 624.0 GFLOPS. But winning the spec sheet is not the same as winning the test, and the database records only one test.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on GCN 1.0 architecture, both use a 28 nm process at TSMC, and both support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The similarities end at the chip level. The HD 8690M uses the Sun chip, a 690 million transistor design on a 56 mm² die. The FirePro M4000 uses the Chelsea chip, which is a much larger part: 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. Transistor density is nearly identical, 12.3M per mm² for the Radeon and 12.2M per mm² for the FirePro, so the difference in transistor count comes almost entirely from the larger die area.

The memory subsystems are very different. The HD 8690M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64 bit bus, yielding 32.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro M4000 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128 bit bus, yielding 64.00 GB/s, exactly double. Both run memory at 1000 MHz with 4 Gbps effective, so the bandwidth gap is purely a function of bus width. The FirePro also has double the ROPs, 16 versus 8, and 60% more TMUs, 32 versus 20. Shading units are 512 versus 320, a 60% advantage for the FirePro.

Clock speeds are only recorded for the HD 8690M: a base of 925 MHz and a boost of 975 MHz. The FirePro M4000 has no base or boost clock listed in the database, so the comparison cannot be made on clock frequency. What is known is that despite having fewer shading units and lower theoretical throughput, the HD 8690M still scores higher in OpenCL. The FirePro’s FP32 output is 691.2 GFLOPS, but the measured score does not reflect that advantage.

The bus interface also differs. The HD 8690M uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the FirePro M4000 uses MXM-A (3.0), which is a module form factor. The FirePro is listed with a TDP of 33 W, a slot width of MXM Module, and no power connectors. The HD 8690M has no TDP, slot width, or power connector data in the database. The FirePro also has display outputs described as “Portable Device Dependent,” while the HD 8690M has no display output listing.

Release dates differ as well. The FirePro M4000 was released on 2012-06-26, and the HD 8690M on 2013-02-28, so the Radeon is the younger part by about eight months. Both are end-of-life. The HD 8690M’s predecessor is London and its successor is Gem System. The FirePro M4000’s predecessor is FirePro Mobility and its successor is Radeon Pro Mobile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only head-to-head benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. The HD 8690M scores 6137, and the FirePro M4000 scores 5537. That is a delta of 10.8% in favor of the HD 8690M. In the context of their nearest rivals, this result is consistent with the overall positioning.

The HD 8690M’s nearest rivals in the database are the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 at 6117 (0.3% behind), the NVIDIA RTX A400 at 6078 (1% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 at 6077 (1% behind), and the AMD Radeon HD 6950 at 6210 (1.2% ahead of the HD 8690M). So the HD 8690M sits in a tight cluster where a 1% swing either way changes the ordering. Its 10.8% lead over the FirePro M4000 is much larger than the gaps between itself and its closest rivals, which suggests that the FirePro is not actually a close competitor in this particular workload.

The FirePro M4000’s nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 at 5508 (0.5% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M at 5501 (0.7% behind), the AMD Radeon R7 M440 at 5483 (1% behind), and the NVIDIA Quadro M500M at 5604 (1.2% ahead of the FirePro). The FirePro’s 5537 score places it in a similar tight cluster, but that cluster is roughly 10% lower than the HD 8690M’s cluster. The two cards are not adjacent in the ranking; they are separated by a clear margin.

Given the FirePro’s hardware advantage in shading units, ROPs, and bandwidth, the benchmark result is counterintuitive. The recorded data does not explain why the smaller chip wins. It may be that the OpenCL workload is sensitive to clock speed, driver optimization, or memory latency rather than raw throughput. The HD 8690M’s boost clock of 975 MHz is listed, while the FirePro’s clocks are absent, so it is possible that the FirePro runs at a lower frequency. Without clock data for the FirePro, the cause cannot be determined from the database. What is certain is that the only measured comparison favors the HD 8690M by a double-digit percentage.

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the AMD Radeon HD 8690M is the better choice for anyone whose priority is OpenCL compute performance. It wins the only benchmark, scores higher in the overall percentile ranking (36th versus 32nd), and does so despite having fewer shading units, fewer ROPs, less memory bandwidth, and lower theoretical FP32 throughput. That is a surprising outcome, and it should prompt a closer look at what the benchmark actually measures.

The AMD FirePro M4000 is the better choice on paper for workloads that might benefit from more memory bandwidth and more parallel hardware. It has double the bus width, double the bandwidth, 60% more shading units, 60% more TMUs, double the ROPs, and a higher pixel rate. Its FP32 output is 691.2 GFLOPS versus 624.0 GFLOPS. If a workload is bandwidth-bound or shader-limited, the FirePro’s architecture suggests it could outperform the Radeon, but the database does not contain a benchmark that demonstrates that.

The data also shows that the FirePro M4000 is a 33 W part on an MXM module, while the HD 8690M has no power or form factor data recorded. For a mobile workstation, the FirePro’s lower TDP and module form factor might be relevant, but the database does not provide enough information to compare thermals or physical fit.

For a user who must choose based on measured performance, the HD 8690M is the answer. For a user who values theoretical compute resources and memory bandwidth, the FirePro M4000 has the stronger specification sheet, but that strength does not show up in the one benchmark that was run. The verdict from the data is straightforward: the HD 8690M wins the only test, and the FirePro M4000 wins the spec comparison, but the two are not interchangeable. They serve different product categories, and the benchmark suggests that category differences matter more than raw hardware counts.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 8690M scores 6137, while the AMD FirePro M4000 scores 5537, giving the HD 8690M a 10.8% advantage.

Q: How do the two compare in memory bandwidth?

A: The FirePro M4000 has 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth on a 128 bit bus, exactly double the HD 8690M’s 32.00 GB/s on a 64 bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The FirePro M4000 has 512 shading units, compared to the HD 8690M’s 320, a 60% difference in favor of the FirePro.

Q: Are both GPUs based on the same architecture?

A: Yes, both use GCN 1.0 architecture and are manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC.

Q: What is the FirePro M4000’s power draw?

A: The database records a TDP of 33 W for the FirePro M4000. No TDP is listed for the HD 8690M.

Q: How do the two GPUs rank among all GPUs in the database?

A: The HD 8690M is at the 36th percentile, and the FirePro M4000 is at the 32nd percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon HD 8690M | AMD FirePro M4000 |

|---------------|---------------------|-------------------|

| Chip | Sun | Chelsea |

| Generation | Solar System (HD 8600M) | FirePro Mobile (Mx000) |

| Transistors | 690 million | 1,500 million |

| Die Size | 56 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.3M / mm² | 12.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 925 MHz | Not listed |

| Boost Clock | 975 MHz | Not listed |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 32.00 GB/s | 64.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 320 | 512 |

| TMUs | 20 | 32 |

| ROPs | 8 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 7.800 GPixel/s | 10.80 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 19.50 GTexel/s | 21.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 624.0 GFLOPS | 691.2 GFLOPS |

| TDP | Not listed | 33 W |

| Slot Width | Not listed | MXM Module |

| Power Connectors | Not listed | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | MXM-A (3.0) |

| Display Outputs | Not listed | Portable Device Dependent |

| Release Date | 2013-02-28 | 2012-06-26 |

| Predecessor | London | FirePro Mobility |

| Successor | Gem System | Radeon Pro Mobile |

| Geekbench OpenCL | 6137 | 5537 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 36 | 32 |

The two cards share the same architecture, process node, foundry, memory type, and API support, but they diverge on nearly every other recorded specification. The FirePro M4000 is the larger chip with more transistors, a bigger die, more shading units, more TMUs, more ROPs, double the memory bus, and double the bandwidth. The HD 8690M has a smaller chip but a higher recorded clock speed, more memory capacity (2 GB versus 1024 MB), and a higher benchmark score. The FirePro has a listed TDP of 33 W and an MXM module form factor, while the HD 8690M has neither listed. The HD 8690M also has a newer release date, about eight months after the FirePro.