AMD FirePro M4000 vs AMD Radeon R7 240 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro M4000 scores 5537 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 9.4% higher than the AMD Radeon R7 240's score of 5063. The FirePro M4000 wins this head-to-head comparison.

Q: How do these two GPUs compare in terms of memory bandwidth?

A: The FirePro M4000 uses 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon R7 240 has 2 GB of DDR3 memory on the same 128-bit bus, but only achieves 28.80 GB/s. That means the FirePro M4000 offers more than double the memory bandwidth.

Q: Are these GPUs from the same architecture generation?

A: Yes, both are built on GCN 1.0 architecture and use a 28 nm process node at TSMC. However, they belong to different product generations: the FirePro M4000 is part of the FirePro Mobile (Mx000) series, while the Radeon R7 240 is from the Volcanic Islands (R7 200) series.

Q: What is the transistor count difference between these two chips?

A: The FirePro M4000's Chelsea chip contains 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. The Radeon R7 240's Oland chip has 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die. The FirePro M4000 has roughly 58% more transistors, though the transistor density is nearly identical at 12.2M/mm² versus 12.3M/mm².

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fillrate?

A: The FirePro M4000 achieves 10.80 GPixel/s, while the Radeon R7 240 manages 6.240 GPixel/s. The FirePro M4000 is 73% faster in pixel throughput.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Their API feature sets are identical despite their performance differences.

Architecture Differences

Both the AMD FirePro M4000 and the AMD Radeon R7 240 are built on GCN 1.0 architecture and manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process. The underlying instruction set and architectural design are fundamentally the same generation. However, the physical implementation differs substantially.

The FirePro M4000 uses the Chelsea chip, which packs 1,500 million transistors into a 123 mm² die. The Radeon R7 240 uses the Oland chip, which contains 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die. The transistor density is almost exactly the same (12.2M/mm² versus 12.3M/mm²), indicating that the difference in transistor count comes purely from die size rather than design density.

The compute resources differ significantly. The FirePro M4000 has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation units. The Radeon R7 240 is cut down to 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. That means the FirePro M4000 has 60% more shading units, 60% more TMUs, and double the ROP count.

Memory architecture also diverges. The FirePro M4000 uses 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory clocked at 1000 MHz with a 4 Gbps effective rate, producing 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth across a 128-bit bus. The Radeon R7 240 uses 2 GB of DDR3 memory at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), yielding only 28.80 GB/s on the same 128-bit bus. The GDDR5 versus DDR3 choice drives a 2.2x bandwidth advantage for the FirePro M4000.

Clock behavior differs too. The FirePro M4000 has no listed base or boost clock in the database, while the Radeon R7 240 runs at a 730 MHz base clock with a 780 MHz boost. The FirePro M4000 relies on its wider execution resources rather than raw clock speed.

Form factor and interface are completely different. The FirePro M4000 is an MXM module (MXM-A 3.0 interface) with portable-device-dependent display outputs, designed for laptops and mobile workstations. The Radeon R7 240 is a single-slot desktop card measuring 168 mm in length and 69 mm in height, using a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface with 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x VGA outputs.

Power requirements are similar: 33 W TDP for the FirePro M4000 versus 30 W for the Radeon R7 240. Neither requires auxiliary power connectors.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one head-to-head benchmark result: Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD FirePro M4000 scores 5537, while the AMD Radeon R7 240 scores 5063. This gives the FirePro M4000 a 9.4% advantage. It is a clear win for the mobile workstation GPU.

Context from the nearest rivals reinforces this gap. The FirePro M4000 sits just 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 (5508), 0.7% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M (5501), and 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 M440 (5483). It trails the NVIDIA Quadro M500M (5604) by 1.2%. The FirePro M4000's percentile rank of 32 means it outperforms 32% of all GPUs in the database.

The Radeon R7 240, by contrast, is exactly tied with the AMD Radeon R7 M340 (5063), sits 0.6% ahead of the AMD FirePro W4170M (5034), 0.9% ahead of the AMD Radeon R5 M430 (5018), and 1.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics (4998). Its percentile rank is 30, meaning it outperforms 30% of all GPUs.

The 9.4% performance gap in the head-to-head test aligns with the architectural differences. The FirePro M4000 has 60% more shading units, 60% more TMUs, double the ROPs, and 2.2x the memory bandwidth. Given those resource advantages, the actual performance delta of 9.4% seems modest, likely constrained by the mobile form factor's power delivery and thermal limits.

The Radeon R7 240 does have one significant advantage: 2 GB of memory versus 1 GB. For OpenCL workloads that require larger working sets, that capacity advantage could help close the gap in specific scenarios, though the bandwidth deficit remains severe.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FirePro M4000 | AMD Radeon R7 240 |

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

| Chip | Chelsea | Oland |

| Generation | FirePro Mobile (Mx000) | Volcanic Islands (R7 200) |

| Transistors | 1,500 million | 950 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 77 mm² |

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

| Base Clock | Not listed | 730 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not listed | 780 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz, 4 Gbps effective | 900 MHz, 1800 Mbps effective |

| Memory Size | 1024 MB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 64.00 GB/s | 28.80 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 512 | 320 |

| TMUs | 32 | 20 |

| ROPs | 16 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 10.80 GPixel/s | 6.240 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 21.60 GTexel/s | 15.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 691.2 GFLOPS | 499.2 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 33 W | 30 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Single-slot |

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

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x VGA |

| Dimensions | Not listed | 168 mm length, 69 mm height |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 200 W |

| Release Date | 2012-06-26 | 2013-10-07 |

| Predecessor | FirePro Mobility | Sea Islands |

| Successor | Radeon Pro Mobile | Pirate Islands |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | 69 USD |

The two GPUs share the same DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170 API support, and both are end-of-life products. The FirePro M4000 was released about 15 months earlier.

Where Each One Wins

AMD FirePro M4000 wins on raw compute throughput. The 691.2 GFLOPS FP32 performance is 38% higher than the Radeon R7 240's 499.2 GFLOPS. This advantage comes from the 512 shading units versus 320, and it shows up directly in the OpenCL benchmark where the FirePro M4000 leads by 9.4%.

AMD FirePro M4000 wins on memory bandwidth. The 64.00 GB/s from GDDR5 is more than double the Radeon R7 240's 28.80 GB/s from DDR3. For memory-bound workloads such as large matrix operations, image processing, or data-intensive OpenCL kernels, this bandwidth advantage will be decisive. The FirePro M4000 also wins on texture rate (21.60 GTexel/s versus 15.60 GTexel/s) and pixel rate (10.80 GPixel/s versus 6.240 GPixel/s).

AMD FirePro M4000 wins on rasterization throughput. With 16 ROPs versus 8, the FirePro M4000 can fill pixels at 73% higher rate. This matters for traditional graphics workloads and for any compute task that involves framebuffer operations.

AMD Radeon R7 240 wins on memory capacity. The 2 GB frame buffer is double the FirePro M4000's 1 GB. For workloads where the working set exceeds 1 GB, the Radeon R7 240 can proceed without spilling to system memory, which can matter more than raw bandwidth in specific scenarios. This is its only clear specification advantage.

AMD Radeon R7 240 wins on desktop integration. The single-slot PCIe 3.0 x8 card with standard display outputs (DVI, HDMI, VGA) is designed to drop into a desktop system. The FirePro M4000 is an MXM module that requires a compatible laptop or mobile workstation chassis. For users with a desktop system, the Radeon R7 240 is the only practical choice between the two.

The performance gap favors the FirePro M4000 overall. The database records one win for the FirePro M4000 and zero for the Radeon R7 240. The 9.4% OpenCL score advantage, combined with the substantial bandwidth and compute resource advantages, makes the FirePro M4000 the stronger GPU for general-purpose compute tasks. The Radeon R7 240's larger memory pool and desktop form factor are its redeeming features, but they do not overcome the measured performance deficit in the benchmark data.