AMD FirePro M4000 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M Comparison

# AMD FirePro M4000 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M

The Verdict

The data makes the decision straightforward: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M is the faster GPU in this pairing, and the margin is substantial. In the only directly comparable benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 765M scores 7,176 against the FirePro M4000's 5,537 — a 22.8% advantage that puts the NVIDIA part clearly ahead. The FirePro M4000's average benchmark score of 5,537 sits within 0.7% of the GTX 765M's 5,501, but that average masks the GTX 765M's broader benchmark coverage, which includes Metal and Vulkan results that the AMD part lacks entirely.

Who should pick which? Strictly from the data, the GTX 765M is the choice for anyone prioritizing raw compute performance and API versatility. It wins the only head-to-head test, delivers higher pixel and texture rates, and supports Vulkan 1.2.175 versus the FirePro's 1.2.170. The FirePro M4000, however, is not without merit: it does draw less power at 33 W versus 75 W, making it the more restrained option for thermally limited mobile chassis. The AMD part also holds a marginal edge in the OpenCL average comparison against the GTX 765M's nearest rival list, but that is a statistical artifact of different rival pools, not a real performance win.

For a workstation-oriented buyer who values OpenCL compute and lower power draw, the FirePro M4000 is defensible. For anyone who wants the faster GPU across the board, the GTX 765M is the verdict — and the data supports it without qualification.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and design philosophies. The AMD FirePro M4000 is built on GCN 1.0 architecture, using the Chelsea chip, and belongs to the FirePro Mobile (Mx000) generation. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M is a Kepler-architecture part, using the GK106 chip, and sits in the GeForce 700M generation. Both are fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process node, and both are end-of-life products, but that is where the similarities end.

The transistor counts differ significantly. The GTX 765M packs 2,540 million transistors on a 221 mm² die, while the FirePro M4000 has 1,500 million transistors on a much smaller 123 mm² die. That translates to a slightly higher transistor density for the AMD chip at 12.2M per mm² versus 11.5M per mm² for NVIDIA, but the raw transistor advantage belongs to the GTX 765M by a wide margin. The larger die and higher transistor budget give NVIDIA more room for compute resources, which shows up directly in the shading unit and texture unit counts.

The FirePro M4000 has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The GTX 765M has 768 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The NVIDIA part has 50% more shading units and double the texture units, which explains its much higher texture rate of 55.23 GTexel/s versus the FirePro's 21.60 GTexel/s. The pixel rates also favor NVIDIA: 13.81 GPixel/s versus 10.80 GPixel/s. The memory subsystems are more closely matched: both use GDDR5 with a 128-bit bus, and the bandwidth is nearly identical at 64.13 GB/s for the GTX 765M and 64.00 GB/s for the FirePro. The GTX 765M does have 2 GB of memory versus the FirePro's 1 GB, a meaningful difference for texture-heavy workloads.

Clock behavior differs as well. The GTX 765M has a base clock of 797 MHz and a boost clock of 863 MHz, while the FirePro M4000 has no listed base or boost clock in the data. The memory clocks are effectively the same — 1000 MHz for AMD and 1002 MHz for NVIDIA, both at 4 Gbps effective. The API support shows a split: the FirePro supports DirectX 12 (11_1) while the GTX 765M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), but NVIDIA counters with Vulkan 1.2.175 versus AMD's 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data shows a clear split in capabilities, but not in overall performance. The GTX 765M wins the only direct head-to-head benchmark, the Geekbench OpenCL test, with a score of 7,176 against the FirePro M4000's 5,537. That is a 22.8% lead, and it is not a narrow margin. The NVIDIA part also has benchmark coverage in Metal (2,612) and Vulkan (6,714), while the FirePro M4000 has no such results in the pack, indicating the GTX 765M is the more versatile option for cross-API compute workloads.

The FirePro M4000 does have one advantage that shows up in the power envelope. Its TDP is 33 W, less than half of the GTX 765M's 75 W. For a mobile workstation or a thin-and-light laptop, that lower power draw could be the deciding factor. The FirePro also uses the MXM-A (3.0) bus interface, while the GTX 765M uses MXM-B (3.0), which may affect compatibility with specific chassis.

In terms of compute throughput, the GTX 765M's FP32 performance of 1,325.6 GFLOPS more than doubles the FirePro's 691.2 GFLOPS. The texture rate advantage is even more pronounced: 55.23 GTexel/s versus 21.60 GTexel/s. The GTX 765M is also newer, with a release date of 2013-05-29 versus the FirePro's 2012-06-26, and it belongs to a consumer gaming series while the FirePro targets professional mobile workstations.

The FirePro M4000's nearest rival list shows it trading blows with the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 (0.5% ahead), the GTX 765M (0.7% ahead), and the AMD Radeon R7 M440 (1% ahead), while trailing the NVIDIA Quadro M500M by 1.2%. The GTX 765M's rival list shows it essentially tied with the MX130 (0.1% behind), ahead of the R7 M440 by 0.3%, ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 by 0.6%, and behind the FirePro M4000 by 0.7%. These deltas are all within noise, but the head-to-head OpenCL result is not.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M scores 7,176 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD FirePro M4000 scores 5,537. That gives NVIDIA a 22.8% lead in this benchmark.

Q: Does the FirePro M4000 have any advantage over the GTX 765M?

A: Yes, the FirePro M4000 has a significantly lower TDP of 33 W compared to 75 W for the GTX 765M. It also uses the MXM-A (3.0) bus interface, which may be required in certain chassis.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: Both GPUs use GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus. The GTX 765M has 2 GB of memory with 64.13 GB/s bandwidth, while the FirePro M4000 has 1 GB with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. The bandwidth difference is negligible, but the GTX 765M has double the memory capacity.

Q: What API support differences exist between the two?

A: The FirePro M4000 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the GTX 765M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The GTX 765M also has Geekbench Metal and Vulkan scores, which the FirePro lacks.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in their average benchmark scores?

A: The FirePro M4000 has an average benchmark score of 5,537, and the GTX 765M has an average of 5,501. The FirePro is 0.7% ahead of the GTX 765M, but this is based on different benchmark sets — the GTX 765M has three benchmarks while the FirePro has one.

Q: Are these GPUs still in production?

A: No, both are end-of-life products. The FirePro M4000 was released on 2012-06-26 and the GTX 765M on 2013-05-29. The FirePro's predecessor is FirePro Mobility and its successor is Radeon Pro Mobile; the GTX 765M's predecessor is GeForce 600M and its successor is GeForce 800M.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it is a decisive win for the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M. The NVIDIA part scores 7,176, while the AMD FirePro M4000 scores 5,537. The delta is 22.8% in NVIDIA's favor, which is a substantial gap for two GPUs that land in the same 32nd percentile of all GPUs. The GTX 765M's raw compute advantage — 1,325.6 GFLOPS FP32 versus 691.2 GFLOPS — explains the OpenCL result, as OpenCL workloads tend to scale with shading unit count and clock speed.

The GTX 765M also demonstrates broader benchmark coverage. It has a Geekbench Metal score of 2,612 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 6,714. The Vulkan score is particularly interesting because it is close to the OpenCL score, suggesting consistent performance across compute APIs. The FirePro M4000 has no Metal or Vulkan results in the pack, so its OpenCL score of 5,537 is its only data point. This makes the FirePro a one-trick pony in the benchmark suite, while the GTX 765M shows versatility.

The texture and pixel rate differences reinforce the head-to-head result. The GTX 765M delivers 55.23 GTexel/s, which is 2.5 times the FirePro's 21.60 GTexel/s. The pixel rate also favors NVIDIA at 13.81 GPixel/s versus 10.80 GPixel/s. These rates are not directly benchmarked, but they are theoretical maximums that correlate with real-world rendering performance. The GTX 765M's 768 shading units and 64 TMUs give it a structural advantage that the FirePro's 512 shading units and 32 TMUs cannot overcome, despite the FirePro's slightly higher memory clock (1000 MHz versus 1002 MHz) being a non-factor.

The nearest rival data places both GPUs in the same performance tier. The FirePro M4000 is 0.5% ahead of the MX130, 0.7% ahead of the GTX 765M, and 1% ahead of the R7 M440, while trailing the Quadro M500M by 1.2%. The GTX 765M is 0.1% behind the MX130, 0.3% ahead of the R7 M440, 0.6% ahead of the Quadro M4000, and 0.7% behind the FirePro. These deltas are all within a 2% band, indicating that the average scores are statistically similar. But the head-to-head OpenCL test is not within that band — it is a 22.8% gap that separates the two GPUs decisively.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal where the two GPUs diverge, and the differences are substantial. The most striking gap is in transistor count: the GTX 765M has 2,540 million transistors on a 221 mm² die, while the FirePro M4000 has 1,500 million on 123 mm². The GTX 765M's die is nearly twice the size, and it uses that space for more compute units.

The shading unit count is 768 for NVIDIA versus 512 for AMD, a 50% advantage. The texture unit count is 64 versus 32, a 100% advantage. The ROP count is the same at 16 for both. The FP32 throughput is 1,325.6 GFLOPS for the GTX 765M versus 691.2 GFLOPS for the FirePro, which is a 91.7% advantage for NVIDIA. The texture rate is 55.23 GTexel/s versus 21.60 GTexel/s, and the pixel rate is 13.81 GPixel/s versus 10.80 GPixel/s.

Memory differs in capacity but not in bus width or bandwidth class. The GTX 765M has 2 GB of GDDR5 versus 1 GB for the FirePro. Both use a 128-bit bus, and the bandwidth is nearly identical: 64.13 GB/s versus 64.00 GB/s. The memory clock is also close: 1002 MHz versus 1000 MHz.

The power envelope is a major differentiator. The FirePro M4000 has a TDP of 33 W, while the GTX 765M has a TDP of 75 W. This is more than a 2x difference and has real implications for laptop design, thermal management, and battery life. The bus interface also differs: the FirePro uses MXM-A (3.0), while the GTX 765M uses MXM-B (3.0). Both use MXM modules and have no power connectors, and both have display outputs that are portable device dependent.

The API support shows a minor split. The FirePro supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the GTX 765M supports DirectX 12 (11_0). The FirePro supports Vulkan 1.2.170, while the GTX 765M supports Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6. Neither GPU has RT cores or tensor cores, and neither lists FP16 performance. The release dates are also different: the FirePro launched on 2012-06-26, and the GTX 765M launched on 2013-05-29, nearly a year later.