AMD FirePro M4000 vs NVIDIA Quadro K3100M Comparison

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M is the stronger mobile workstation GPU, beating the AMD FirePro M4000 by 10% in Geekbench OpenCL (6154 vs 5537). If you need raw compute throughput, the K3100M is the clear pick. The FirePro M4000, however, is the efficiency choice — its 33W TDP is less than half the K3100M’s 75W, making it suitable for thinner, cooler mobile workstations. But that efficiency comes at a steep cost in memory capacity and bandwidth, areas where the K3100M dominates.

For users running OpenCL workloads, the K3100M’s 10% advantage translates to a tangible performance lead. The FirePro M4000 sits at the 32nd percentile of all GPUs, while the K3100M sits at the 30th — both are mid-pack performers, but the K3100M’s average benchmark score of 5154 trails its own OpenCL result, indicating it has broader API coverage. The FirePro M4000 has only one benchmark result, limiting its comparative scope.

Professionals needing 4GB of VRAM for large datasets or high-resolution textures have only one option here. The FirePro M4000’s 1GB frame buffer is a severe constraint for modern workloads, regardless of its compute efficiency. The verdict: pick the K3100M for performance and capacity; pick the FirePro M4000 only if power draw is the absolute priority.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on TSMC’s 28nm process, but they diverge sharply in every other architectural aspect. The FirePro M4000 uses AMD’s GCN 1.0 architecture with the Chelsea chip, packing 1,500 million transistors into a 123 mm² die — a density of 12.2M transistors per mm². The K3100M uses NVIDIA’s Kepler architecture with the GK104 chip, which houses 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, for a density of 12.0M per mm². The K3100M’s die is nearly 2.4 times larger, and its transistor count is more than double that of the FirePro.

The compute resources tell the same story. The K3100M has 768 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units. The FirePro M4000 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs — exactly half the TMUs and ROPs, and two-thirds of the shading units. These hardware differences explain the K3100M’s higher theoretical peak rates: 1,084.4 GFLOPS FP32, 45.18 GTexel/s, and 11.30 GPixel/s, versus the FirePro’s 691.2 GFLOPS, 21.60 GTexel/s, and 10.80 GPixel/s.

Memory architecture is a decisive differentiator. The K3100M uses a 256-bit bus with 4GB of GDDR5 and delivers 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro M4000 has a 128-bit bus with only 1GB of GDDR5, yielding 64.00 GB/s. Memory clocks also differ: the K3100M runs at 800 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective), while the FirePro runs at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) — the FirePro’s faster memory clock partially compensates for its narrower bus, but not enough to close the bandwidth gap.

API support is closely matched. Both support DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6. The FirePro M4000 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the K3100M lists DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. The K3100M has a slightly newer Vulkan version, and the FirePro has a marginally higher DirectX feature level. Neither supports ray tracing or tensor cores — both fields are null in the data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is decisive. The K3100M scores 6154, while the FirePro M4000 scores 5537 — a 10% delta in favor of NVIDIA. This is the sole head-to-head benchmark, and the K3100M wins it outright (1 win, 0 for AMD).

Contextualizing this score: the FirePro M4000’s nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 at 5508, a 0.5% difference, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M at 5501, a 0.7% difference. The AMD Radeon R7 M440 trails by 1% at 5483. The FirePro’s OpenCL score aligns closely with these mid-range mobile parts, suggesting it competes in that tier. The K3100M’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R7 M260X at 5161 (0.1% lower), the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M at 5211 (1.1% lower), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M at 5236 (1.6% lower). The K3100M’s OpenCL score leads these by a comfortable margin.

The K3100M also has additional benchmark results that the FirePro lacks. In Geekbench Metal, it scores 3823; in Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 5484. These results show API-dependent performance variation — the K3100M performs strongest in OpenCL, weakest in Metal, and lands in between for Vulkan. The FirePro M4000 has no Metal or Vulkan benchmark data, so no cross-API comparison is possible.

The average benchmark score further complicates the picture. The K3100M’s average across all three tests is 5154, which is lower than its OpenCL score alone. This drag comes from the Metal result. The FirePro M4000’s average equals its OpenCL score at 5537, since it has only one benchmark. On average, the FirePro actually leads (5537 vs 5154), but this is misleading — it reflects the K3100M’s broader benchmark coverage, not a performance advantage.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K3100M wins by 10%, scoring 6154 against the AMD FirePro M4000’s 5537 in Geekbench OpenCL.

Q: Which GPU has more memory?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K3100M has 4GB of GDDR5, while the AMD FirePro M4000 has only 1GB. The K3100M also has a wider 256-bit bus versus 128-bit, and higher bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s versus 64.00 GB/s.

Q: Which GPU has a lower power draw?

A: The AMD FirePro M4000 draws 33W, while the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M draws 75W. The FirePro uses less than half the power.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Both support DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6. The FirePro M4000 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. The K3100M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175.

Q: How do these GPUs compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The FirePro M4000 is 0.5% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 and 0.7% faster than the GTX 765M. The K3100M is 0.1% slower than the AMD Radeon R7 M260X and 1.1% slower than the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M in average scores.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K3100M has 768 shading units, compared to 512 on the AMD FirePro M4000. The K3100M also has double the TMUs (64 vs 32) and double the ROPs (32 vs 16).

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA Quadro K3100M wins on raw performance. The 10% OpenCL lead is matched by superior hardware: 50% more shading units (768 vs 512), double the texture units and ROPs, and 56.25% more FP32 throughput (1,084.4 GFLOPS vs 691.2 GFLOPS). Its texture rate of 45.18 GTexel/s is more than double the FirePro’s 21.60 GTexel/s, making it the better choice for texture-heavy workloads. The 4GB memory capacity and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth are decisive for large datasets, high-resolution rendering, or multi-application workflows. The K3100M also offers broader API coverage with Metal and Vulkan benchmark results, indicating it supports those APIs in practice.

AMD FirePro M4000 wins on efficiency. At 33W, it consumes less than half the K3100M’s 75W. For mobile workstations where battery life and thermal management are critical, this is a significant advantage. The FirePro also has a faster memory clock (1000 MHz vs 800 MHz, 4 Gbps vs 3.2 Gbps effective), which partially offsets its narrower bus. Its smaller die (123 mm² vs 294 mm²) and lower transistor count (1,500 million vs 3,540 million) suggest lower manufacturing costs and potentially better yields, though pricing data is not available. The FirePro’s slightly higher DirectX feature level (11_1 vs 11_0) is a minor edge for legacy DirectX 11 applications.

The K3100M is the workstation workhorse; the FirePro M4000 is the efficiency specialist. If the workload is compute-bound and VRAM-hungry, the K3100M is the only rational choice. If the priority is a thin, cool, low-power laptop that handles lighter OpenCL tasks, the FirePro M4000 fits. The K3100M’s production status and release date (July 2013) versus the FirePro’s (June 2012) show the NVIDIA part is a generation newer, which likely contributes to its architectural advantages.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FirePro M4000 | NVIDIA Quadro K3100M |

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

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |

| Chip | Chelsea | GK104 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 1,500 million | 3,540 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.2M / mm² | 12.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | — | 706 MHz |

| Boost Clock | — | 706 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) | 800 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 1024 MB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 64.00 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 512 | 768 |

| TMUs | 32 | 64 |

| ROPs | 16 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 10.80 GPixel/s | 11.30 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 21.60 GTexel/s | 45.18 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 691.2 GFLOPS | 1,084.4 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 33 W | 75 W |

| Bus Interface | MXM-A (3.0) | MXM-B (3.0) |

| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.2.175 |

| Release Date | 2012-06-26 | 2013-07-22 |

| Generation | FirePro Mobile (Mx000) | Quadro Kepler-M (Kx100M) |

| Predecessor | FirePro Mobility | Quadro Fermi-M |

| Successor | Radeon Pro Mobile | Quadro Maxwell-M |