AMD FirePro M4000 vs AMD Radeon RX 6400 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records a single direct comparison between these two GPUs, and the result is decisively one-sided. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon RX 6400 scores 32,011 points against the AMD FirePro M4000's 5,537 points. That works out to a 478.1% advantage for the RX 6400, meaning it delivers nearly six times the raw compute throughput in this particular workload. This is the only shared benchmark in the database, so the head-to-head picture is narrow but unambiguous.

Placing these scores in context, the RX 6400's average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 6,001, which puts it in the 35th percentile of all GPUs tracked. Its nearest rivals by average score are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M at 6,000 (a 0% delta), the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server at 5,996 (0.1% ahead), the AMD FirePro W4100 at 5,987 (0.2% ahead), and the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M at 5,986 (0.3% ahead). The RX 6400 sits essentially at parity with these cards in aggregate performance, though individual workloads can shift the picture dramatically.

The FirePro M4000, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 5,537, placing it in the 32nd percentile. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 at 5,508 (0.5% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M at 5,501 (0.7% behind), the AMD Radeon R7 M440 at 5,483 (1% behind), and the NVIDIA Quadro M500M at 5,604 (1.2% ahead). The FirePro M4000 is therefore clustered with a group of modest mobile and entry-level parts, whereas the RX 6400 sits in a slightly higher performance tier.

The single head-to-head result is the only place where both cards appear in the same test, and it shows the generational gap clearly. The RX 6400's Geekbench OpenCL score of 32,011 dwarfs the FirePro M4000's 5,537, but that test favors the newer architecture heavily. Looking at the RX 6400's other benchmark results, its Passmark G3D score of 7,673 and Geekbench Vulkan score of 16,372 suggest strong overall capability, while the FirePro M4000 has no recorded results in those tests. The database records one win for the RX 6400 and zero for the FirePro M4000 in their direct comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the only recorded head-to-head benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6400 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 32,011 versus the AMD FirePro M4000's 5,537, a 478.1% difference.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The RX 6400 has an average benchmark score of 6,001 across all recorded tests, while the FirePro M4000 averages 5,537. The RX 6400 sits in the 35th percentile of all GPUs, the FirePro M4000 in the 32nd.

Q: What architecture does each card use?

A: The RX 6400 uses the RDNA 2.0 architecture on the Navi 24 chip, built on a 6 nm process. The FirePro M4000 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture on the Chelsea chip, built on a 28 nm process.

Q: Do both cards support DirectX 12?

A: Yes, but at different feature levels. The RX 6400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the FirePro M4000 supports DirectX 12 (11_1).

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The RX 6400 has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 128.0 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro M4000 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has higher pixel and texture rates?

A: The RX 6400 records 74.27 GPixel/s and 111.4 GTexel/s, compared to the FirePro M4000's 10.80 GPixel/s and 21.60 GTexel/s.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs spans a decade of AMD design evolution. The RX 6400 is built on RDNA 2.0, using the Navi 24 chip, and represents the Navi II generation from the RX 6000 series. The FirePro M4000 uses the older GCN 1.0 architecture with the Chelsea chip, belonging to the FirePro Mobile Mx000 generation. This architectural shift explains most of the performance disparity observed in the benchmarks.

Manufacturing technology differs sharply. The RX 6400 is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, packing 5,400 million transistors into a 107 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 50.5 million per mm². The FirePro M4000 uses a 28 nm process, also at TSMC, with 1,500 million transistors on a larger 123 mm² die, giving a density of 12.2 million per mm². The RX 6400 therefore crams over three times more transistors into a smaller area, a direct result of the more advanced node.

Compute resources scale accordingly. The RX 6400 carries 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, 32 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores. The FirePro M4000 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores listed. The RX 6400's FP32 throughput is 3.565 TFLOPS, while the FirePro M4000 manages 691.2 GFLOPS, a fivefold difference. The RX 6400 also supports FP16 at 7.130 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, a capability the FirePro M4000 does not list.

API support reflects the newer architecture's feature set. The RX 6400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The FirePro M4000 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The RX 6400's ray tracing cores and 12_2 feature level enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing and mesh shaders, none of which are available on the older GCN design.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every measurable specification. Process node: 6 nm for the RX 6400 versus 28 nm for the FirePro M4000. Transistor count: 5,400 million versus 1,500 million. Die size: 107 mm² versus 123 mm², with the RX 6400 being smaller despite more transistors. Transistor density: 50.5M per mm² versus 12.2M per mm².

Clock speeds show the RX 6400 running at 1923 MHz base, 2321 MHz boost, and 2039 MHz game clock, while the FirePro M4000 lists no base, boost, or game clocks in the database. Memory clocks differ as well: the RX 6400 runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective, the FirePro M4000 at 1000 MHz with 4 Gbps effective.

Memory capacity and bandwidth diverge significantly. The RX 6400 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus delivering 128.0 GB/s. The FirePro M4000 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus delivering 64.00 GB/s. Despite having half the bus width, the RX 6400 achieves double the bandwidth thanks to faster memory.

Shading units, TMUs, and ROPs all favor the RX 6400: 768 versus 512 shading units, 48 versus 32 TMUs, and 32 versus 16 ROPs. The RX 6400 adds 12 ray tracing cores, which the FirePro M4000 lacks. Pixel rate is 74.27 GPixel/s versus 10.80 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 111.4 GTexel/s versus 21.60 GTexel/s. FP32 output is 3.565 TFLOPS versus 691.2 GFLOPS, and FP16 is 7.130 TFLOPS on the RX 6400 only.

Power and physical specifications also differ. The RX 6400 has a 53 W TDP, is single-slot, requires no power connectors, and suggests a 250 W PSU. The FirePro M4000 has a 33 W TDP, uses an MXM Module form factor, requires no power connectors, and lists no suggested PSU. Bus interfaces are PCIe 4.0 x4 for the RX 6400 versus MXM-A (3.0) for the FirePro M4000. Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.1 and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a on the RX 6400, while the FirePro M4000's outputs are listed as portable device dependent.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for anyone choosing between these two. The RX 6400 leads the FirePro M4000 by 478.1% in the only direct benchmark comparison, and its average benchmark score of 6,001 versus 5,537 confirms a consistent advantage. The RX 6400 also places higher in the overall GPU percentile ranking at 35th versus 32nd.

The FirePro M4000's remaining advantage is purely historical. It was released in June 2012, belongs to the FirePro Mobile generation, and uses the GCN 1.0 architecture. The RX 6400, released in January 2022, is from the Radeon RX 6000 series and uses RDNA 2.0. Ten years of architectural progress separate them, and the benchmark results reflect that gap.

For raw performance, the RX 6400 is the only reasonable choice. Its 4 GB GDDR6 memory, 128 GB/s bandwidth, and 3.565 TFLOPS FP32 throughput make it suitable for modern workloads. The FirePro M4000's 1024 MB GDDR5 memory and 691.2 GFLOPS FP32 are severely limited by comparison. The RX 6400's support for DirectX 12 Ultimate and ray tracing cores adds modern features the FirePro M4000 cannot match.

The FirePro M4000 does have one practical consideration: its 33 W TDP is lower than the RX 6400's 53 W, and its MXM module form factor may fit specific portable systems. But the database shows no benchmark where the FirePro M4000 wins, and its single recorded score of 5,537 in Geekbench OpenCL is less than one-fifth of the RX 6400's result in the same test.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6400 wins every benchmark category where both cards have recorded data. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 32,011 against 5,537. Its other recorded results include a Passmark G3D score of 7,673, a Geekbench Vulkan score of 16,372, and a Passmark GPU Compute score of 2,812, none of which have corresponding FirePro M4000 results in the database.

The RX 6400 is the pick for any application requiring modern graphics features, high memory bandwidth, or substantial compute throughput. Its 12 ray tracing cores enable hardware ray tracing, its DirectX 12 Ultimate support covers the latest game APIs, and its 128 GB/s bandwidth allows for higher resolution textures than the FirePro M4000's 64 GB/s. The RX 6400's 4 GB memory capacity is four times the FirePro M4000's 1024 MB, making it more viable for current game titles and GPU-accelerated workloads.

The FirePro M4000's niche is limited to systems that require its specific MXM-A (3.0) interface or its lower 33 W power draw. It has no benchmark wins in the database, and its only recorded score places it below the RX 6400's average by a wide margin. For legacy compatibility with GCN 1.0-era software or portable devices with MXM slots, it remains an option, but the data shows no performance scenario where it outperforms the RX 6400.

In practical terms, the RX 6400 suits desktop builds with PCIe 4.0 x4 slots, single-slot chassis requirements, and no external power connector needs. The FirePro M4000 suits mobile workstations from its 2012 era, where its 33 W TDP and MXM form factor were appropriate. For any modern workload, the RX 6400's 478.1% lead in the head-to-head Geekbench OpenCL test is the definitive statistic.