GPU Comparison

The data places the NVIDIA Quadro M500M and AMD FirePro M4000 nearly on top of each other in raw aggregate performance, but the single available head-to-head benchmark reveals a distinct edge for the NVIDIA part. The Quadro M500M posts an average benchmark score of 5604 against the FirePro M4000’s 5537, a difference of 1.2% in favor of NVIDIA. This gap widens to 8.1% in the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the Quadro scores 5986 versus 5537. Both cards sit at the 32nd percentile of all GPUs, meaning they occupy the same performance tier. The Quadro M500M also benefits from a newer architecture, a later release date, and double the memory capacity, though the FirePro M4000 counters with a wider memory bus and significantly higher bandwidth.

The Verdict

For workloads that stress compute throughput, the NVIDIA Quadro M500M is the clear choice based on the benchmark data. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 5986 beats the AMD FirePro M4000’s 5537 by 8.1%, a substantial margin for two cards in the same performance percentile. The Quadro also holds a 1.2% advantage in average benchmark score (5604 vs 5537), reinforcing its overall lead. The FirePro M4000’s only claim to superiority lies in its memory subsystem, 64.00 GB/s bandwidth versus 14.40 GB/s, which could matter for bandwidth-sensitive tasks, but the benchmark results do not show this translating into a compute win.

The FirePro M4000 is end-of-life and predates the Quadro by nearly four years, as its release date of June 2012 compares to April 2016 for the Quadro. If the choice is between these two for any modern workflow, the Quadro M500M’s superior compute scores and newer feature set make it the safer pick. The FirePro M4000 would only be relevant if the workload is entirely memory-bound and the 64.00 GB/s bandwidth proves decisive, but no benchmark in the data supports that scenario.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Quadro M500M wins the only head-to-head benchmark available: Geekbench OpenCL, with a score of 5986 against the FirePro M4000’s 5537. This 8.1% advantage indicates that the Quadro’s compute architecture, despite having fewer shading units (384 vs 512), delivers higher real-world throughput in OpenCL workloads. The Quadro also edges out the FirePro in the aggregate average benchmark score (5604 vs 5537), suggesting consistency across multiple test scenarios.

The AMD FirePro M4000 has no benchmark wins in the data, winsA is 1 and winsB is 0. However, its specifications point to potential advantages in specific scenarios. The FirePro’s 128-bit memory bus and 64.00 GB/s bandwidth dwarf the Quadro’s 64-bit bus and 14.40 GB/s bandwidth, which could benefit texture-heavy or frame-buffer-intensive tasks. Its higher pixel rate (10.80 GPixel/s vs 8.992 GPixel/s) and texture rate (21.60 GTexel/s vs 17.98 GTexel/s) also suggest faster rasterization throughput on paper, but these do not appear in the benchmark results as wins.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations. The NVIDIA Quadro M500M uses the GM108S chip built on the Maxwell architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process. It packs 1,020 million transistors into a 77 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.2M per mm². The AMD FirePro M4000 uses the Chelsea chip based on the older GCN 1.0 architecture, also on TSMC’s 28 nm node, but with 1,500 million transistors spread across a larger 123 mm² die, resulting in a lower density of 12.2M per mm².

The FirePro’s larger die allows for more processing units: 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units, versus the Quadro’s 384 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. However, the Quadro compensates with higher clock speeds, 1029 MHz base and 1124 MHz boost, whereas the FirePro’s clocks are not listed. This clock advantage helps the Quadro achieve higher FP32 performance at 863.2 GFLOPS versus the FirePro’s 691.2 GFLOPS, despite having fewer cores.

Memory configurations differ dramatically. The Quadro uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, providing 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro uses 1 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, providing 64.00 GB/s, over four times the bandwidth. The FirePro also supports a higher DirectX version (12 with 11_1 feature level vs 12 with 11_0) and a lower Vulkan version (1.2.170 vs 1.4). Both support OpenGL 4.6.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M500M has an average benchmark score of 5604, which is 1.2% higher than the AMD FirePro M4000’s 5537.

Q: How much faster is the Quadro M500M in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The Quadro M500M scores 5986 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 8.1% higher than the FirePro M4000’s 5537.

Q: Does the FirePro M4000 have any benchmark wins over the Quadro M500M?

A: No. In the head-to-head benchmark data, the Quadro M500M wins 1 test and the FirePro M4000 wins 0.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The FirePro M4000 has 64.00 GB/s bandwidth from its 128-bit GDDR5 memory, while the Quadro M500M has 14.40 GB/s from its 64-bit DDR3 memory.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD FirePro M4000 has 512 shading units, compared to the NVIDIA Quadro M500M’s 384 shading units.

Q: What are the release date differences?

A: The AMD FirePro M4000 was released in June 2012, while the NVIDIA Quadro M500M was released in April 2016.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the NVIDIA Quadro M500M scores 5986 against the AMD FirePro M4000’s 5537. This 8.1% delta is the largest margin between the two in any metric. The Quadro achieves this despite having fewer shading units (384 vs 512) and a smaller memory bus (64-bit vs 128-bit), which suggests its Maxwell architecture extracts better compute efficiency from each core and clock cycle. The Quadro’s higher FP32 throughput (863.2 GFLOPS vs 691.2 GFLOPS) likely contributes directly to this OpenCL lead.

In the aggregate average benchmark score, the Quadro maintains its advantage but by a smaller margin, 5604 versus 5537, a 1.2% difference. This narrower gap indicates that in other, unspecified benchmark scenarios, the FirePro M4000’s superior memory bandwidth (64.00 GB/s vs 14.40 GB/s) and higher pixel/texture rates (10.80 GPixel/s and 21.60 GTexel/s vs 8.992 GPixel/s and 17.98 GTexel/s) may partially close the gap, even though it does not overtake the Quadro in any recorded test.

The Quadro’s nearest rivals list shows it beating the AMD FirePro M4000 by 1.2%, while also leading the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 by 1.7% and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M by 1.9%, but trailing the AMD Radeon HD 8790M by 1.5%. The FirePro M4000’s own rival list shows it nearly matching the GeForce MX130 (0.5% ahead), the GTX 765M (0.7% ahead), and the Radeon R7 M440 (1% ahead), while trailing the Quadro by 1.2%. These numbers place both cards in a tightly packed mid-range mobile GPU tier.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro M500M | AMD FirePro M4000 |

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

| Architecture | Maxwell | GCN 1.0 |

| Chip | GM108S | Chelsea |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 1,020 million | 1,500 million |

| Die Size | 77 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.2M / mm² | 12.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1029 MHz | Not listed |

| Boost Clock | 1124 MHz | Not listed |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 14.40 GB/s | 64.00 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) | 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) |

| Shading Units | 384 | 512 |

| TMUs | 16 | 32 |

| ROPs | 8 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 8.992 GPixel/s | 10.80 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 17.98 GTexel/s | 21.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 863.2 GFLOPS | 691.2 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 30 W | 33 W |

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

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

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.2.170 |

| Release Date | 2016-04-26 | 2012-06-26 |

| Predecessor | Quadro Kepler-M | FirePro Mobility |

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

| Production Status | End-of-life | End-of-life |

The Quadro M500M leads in FP32 compute, memory capacity, and API support for Vulkan. The FirePro M4000 leads in memory bandwidth, memory bus width, shading units, TMUs, ROPs, pixel rate, and texture rate. Both use the MXM-A (3.0) interface and have no power connectors, with TDPs of 30 W and 33 W respectively. The Quadro’s newer release date aligns with its more modern Maxwell architecture, while the FirePro’s GCN 1.0 design is older but features a wider memory path.