AMD FirePro M4000 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD FirePro M4000 compare to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M in overall benchmark performance?

A: The data shows a single head-to-head benchmark result, with the GTX 980M winning decisively. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 980M scores 23,832 versus the FirePro M4000's 5,537, a delta of -76.8% from the AMD part's perspective.

Q: What is the percentile ranking of each GPU among all GPUs?

A: The FirePro M4000 sits at the 32nd percentile, while the GTX 980M sits just below at the 31st percentile. Despite the massive performance gap in the head-to-head test, both cards are numerically close in overall percentile rankings, which suggests the database's averaging methodology weighs multiple factors.

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: Interestingly, the FirePro M4000 has an average benchmark score of 5,537, while the GTX 980M has an average of 5,308. This means the AMD card's average is higher, despite losing the single head-to-head test by a wide margin.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each GPU based on average scores?

A: For the FirePro M4000, the nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 (5,508, +0.5%), GTX 765M (5,501, +0.7%), Radeon R7 M440 (5,483, +1%), and Quadro M500M (5,604, -1.2%). For the GTX 980M, the nearest rivals are the GeForce 930A (5,317, -0.2%), 840M (5,322, -0.3%), 940M (5,284, +0.5%), and Radeon R7 M445 (5,358, -0.9%).

Q: What are the release dates for both GPUs?

A: The AMD FirePro M4000 was released on 2012-06-26, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M was released on 2014-10-06. Both are marked as end-of-life products.

Q: What API support does each GPU offer?

A: The FirePro M4000 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The GTX 980M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, giving the NVIDIA card a more recent Vulkan version.

Architecture Differences

The AMD FirePro M4000 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M represent fundamentally different design philosophies from different generations. The FirePro M4000 is built on GCN 1.0 architecture using the Chelsea chip, while the GTX 980M uses Maxwell 2.0 architecture with the GM204 chip. Both are fabricated on TSMC's 28 nm process, but the transistor counts diverge sharply: the FirePro packs 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, while the GTX 980M crams 5,200 million transistors onto a 398 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 12.2M per mm² for the AMD part versus 13.1M per mm² for NVIDIA.

The shader configuration reveals the scale of difference. The FirePro M4000 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The GTX 980M triples the shading units to 1,536, triples the TMUs to 96, and quadruples the ROPs to 64. These are not incremental improvements; they represent a generational leap in parallel processing capability. The GTX 980M also carries 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, whereas the FirePro M4000 has just 1 GB on a 128-bit bus.

Clock behavior differs as well. The FirePro M4000 has no listed base or boost clock in the data, only a memory clock of 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective). The GTX 980M has explicit base and boost clocks of 1038 MHz and 1127 MHz respectively, with a memory clock of 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The memory bandwidth gap is enormous: 64.00 GB/s for the FirePro versus 160.4 GB/s for the GTX 980M.

The GTX 980M supports a newer DirectX version (12_1 versus 11_1) and a newer Vulkan version (1.4 versus 1.2.170). Both use MXM modules, but with different bus interfaces: MXM-A (3.0) for the AMD part and MXM-B (3.0) for the NVIDIA. Power draw is listed only for the FirePro M4000 at 33 W, while the GTX 980M has no TDP figure in the data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only head-to-head benchmark available is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is one-sided. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M scores 23,832, while the AMD FirePro M4000 scores 5,537. That represents a delta of -76.8% for the AMD card — meaning the GTX 980M delivers roughly four times the OpenCL compute performance. This is not a close contest by any measure.

Contextualizing this within the nearest rivals shows how dramatic the gap is. The FirePro M4000's nearest competitors all hover within a narrow band: the MX130 at 5,508, GTX 765M at 5,501, R7 M440 at 5,483, and Quadro M500M at 5,604. The GTX 980M's OpenCL score of 23,832 is over four times higher than any of those. Meanwhile, the GTX 980M's nearest rivals in the database — the GeForce 930A (5,317), 840M (5,322), 940M (5,284), and R7 M445 (5,358) — are all in the same low range as the FirePro M4000, not in the GTX 980M's league.

This creates a strange situation in the database. The GTX 980M's average benchmark score of 5,308 is dragged down by its other benchmark results, which include Passmark tests with lower scores: DirectX 9 at 125, DirectX 10 at 35, DirectX 11 at 57, DirectX 12 at 31, G2D at 490, G3D at 7,338, and GPU Compute at 2,816. The FirePro M4000 has only the one Geekbench OpenCL score, so its average equals that single result.

The win count reflects the data: NVIDIA takes 1 head-to-head win, AMD takes 0. The magnitude of that single win, however, is so large that it dwarfs any other consideration in direct comparison.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every measurable specification. Process node is identical at 28 nm and both use TSMC as the foundry, but that is where the similarities end.

Chip and Transistors: The FirePro M4000 uses the Chelsea chip with 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. The GTX 980M uses GM204 with 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die. Transistor density is 12.2M/mm² versus 13.1M/mm².

Memory: The FirePro M4000 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 980M has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute Units: Shading units are 512 versus 1,536. TMUs are 32 versus 96. ROPs are 16 versus 64.

Clock Speeds: The FirePro M4000 has no base or boost clock listed and a memory clock of 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective). The GTX 980M has a base clock of 1038 MHz, boost of 1127 MHz, and memory clock of 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective).

Performance Rates: Pixel rate is 10.80 GPixel/s versus 72.13 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 21.60 GTexel/s versus 108.2 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 691.2 GFLOPS versus 3.462 TFLOPS.

Power and Interface: The FirePro M4000 has a TDP of 33 W; the GTX 980M has no TDP listed. Both use MXM modules with no power connectors, but the bus interfaces differ: MXM-A (3.0) versus MXM-B (3.0).

API Support: DirectX is 12 (11_1) versus 12 (12_1). OpenGL is 4.6 for both. Vulkan is 1.2.170 versus 1.4.

Release and Status: The FirePro M4000 was released 2012-06-26; the GTX 980M was released 2014-10-06. Both are end-of-life. Predecessors are FirePro Mobility versus GeForce 800M. Successors are Radeon Pro Mobile versus GeForce 10 Mobile.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M wins decisively in raw compute benchmarks. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 23,832 versus 5,537 is a 76.8% advantage for NVIDIA, and the specification sheet reinforces this: 3x the shading units, 6x the ROPs, 3x the TMUs, 2.5x the memory bandwidth, and 5x the FP32 throughput. For any workload that stresses parallel floating-point computation — OpenCL compute, modern game rendering, GPU-accelerated tasks — the GTX 980M is the clear choice.

The GTX 980M also wins in memory capacity and bandwidth. With 8 GB versus 1 GB and 160.4 GB/s versus 64.00 GB/s, it can handle larger textures, higher resolutions, and more complex scenes without running out of memory. The higher DirectX version (12_1) and Vulkan version (1.4) also position it better for newer software titles.

The AMD FirePro M4000 wins in a narrower set of circumstances. Its average benchmark score of 5,537 is actually higher than the GTX 980M's 5,308, which reflects the database's averaging across multiple tests. The FirePro M4000 also has a lower TDP at 33 W, which could matter in thermally constrained laptop chassis. Its smaller die (123 mm² versus 398 mm²) and fewer transistors (1,500 million versus 5,200 million) suggest lower manufacturing complexity, though both are end-of-life.

The percentile rankings are nearly identical — 32nd versus 31st — which suggests that in the broader context of all GPUs, neither card is particularly exceptional. The FirePro M4000's single benchmark result places it in the same performance tier as entry-level GeForce 900-series and MX-series parts, while the GTX 980M's multiple benchmark results pull its average down despite the strong OpenCL showing.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split between two very different products. The AMD FirePro M4000 is a low-power professional mobile GPU from 2012, designed for workstations where efficiency matters more than raw speed. Its 33 W TDP, 512 shading units, and 1 GB of memory place it firmly in the entry-level segment. Its single Geekbench OpenCL score of 5,537 puts it within 1% of the GeForce MX130 and GTX 765M, and its percentile rank of 32 confirms it as a modest performer.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M is in a different class entirely. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 23,832 is 76.8% higher than the FirePro M4000's, and its specification sheet shows 3x the shading units, 6x the ROPs, and 5x the FP32 compute. It also supports newer API versions and has 8x the memory capacity. The GTX 980M's lower average benchmark score of 5,308 is an artifact of the database including multiple Passmark tests where it scores in the 31-490 range, but those results do not diminish its OpenCL dominance.

Who should pick which? If the workload is OpenCL compute or modern gaming, the GTX 980M is the only rational choice — the performance gap is too large to ignore. If the priority is a low-power, compact MXM module for a workstation with modest graphical demands, the FirePro M4000's 33 W TDP and simpler architecture could be sufficient. The FirePro M4000 also has a higher average benchmark score, but that is a statistical quirk of the limited benchmark data rather than a meaningful performance advantage.

The question is whether the two-year release gap (2012 versus 2014) explains the entire disparity or whether the architectures themselves are the deciding factor. GCN 1.0 versus Maxwell 2.0 represents a significant evolution in GPU design, but the specification differences are so vast that even a same-generation comparison would likely favor the NVIDIA part. For anyone choosing between these two today, the data is unambiguous: the GTX 980M wins on every meaningful performance metric, while the FirePro M4000 offers only efficiency advantages.