AMD FirePro M4150 vs AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 Comparison

The AMD FirePro M4150 and the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 represent two very different approaches to graphics hardware, separated by their target platforms, architectural generations, and physical design constraints. The data shows a narrow performance margin between them, but the underlying specifications reveal significant philosophical differences in how each card was engineered. This analysis walks through the benchmark results, architectural contrasts, and specification gaps to determine which card holds the edge in specific scenarios.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only available benchmark comparison is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are extremely close. The AMD FirePro M4150 scores 4013 points, while the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 scores 3977 points. This gives the FirePro M4150 a 0.9% advantage, a margin so slim that it falls well within typical run-to-run variance for benchmark testing. The FirePro M4150 edges out a win, but the data indicates these two cards are effectively performance equals in this compute-oriented workload.

Contextualizing these scores against their respective nearest rivals reinforces how tightly grouped this performance tier is. The FirePro M4150 sits just 0.5% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M (which scores 4033) and 1.2% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 (scoring 3964). Meanwhile, the Radeon HD 6850 X2 is 0.3% ahead of the Quadro K2000 and 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 830M (scoring 3957). Both cards land at the 24th percentile among all GPUs in the database, meaning they occupy the same performance neighborhood relative to the entire field. The benchmark results indicate that despite their vastly different architectures and physical designs, they deliver nearly identical raw compute throughput in this specific test.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD FirePro M4150 scores 4013 points compared to the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2’s 3977 points, a 0.9% difference that makes the FirePro M4150 the winner in this single benchmark.

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

A: The FirePro M4150 is 0.5% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M (4033) and 1.2% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 (3964). The Radeon HD 6850 X2 is 0.3% ahead of the Quadro K2000 and 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 830M (3957).

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two chips?

A: The FirePro M4150’s Opal chip packs 950 million transistors into a 77 mm² die, yielding a density of 12.3 million transistors per mm². The Radeon HD 6850 X2’s Barts chip contains 1,700 million transistors on a 255 mm² die, giving a density of 6.7 million transistors per mm².

Q: Which card supports Vulkan?

A: The AMD FirePro M4150 supports Vulkan 1.2.170, while the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 has no Vulkan support listed in the data.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The FirePro M4150 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon HD 6850 X2 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 134.4 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The FirePro M4150 has no TDP listed and uses an MXM Module slot width, indicating a mobile-oriented design. The Radeon HD 6850 X2 has a TDP of 254 W, requires two 8-pin power connectors, and needs a 600 W suggested PSU.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split between these two GPUs is stark. The FirePro M4150 is built on GCN 1.0 architecture using the Opal chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This newer process node allows for a transistor density of 12.3 million per mm², packing 950 million transistors into just 77 mm². The Radeon HD 6850 X2, by contrast, uses the older TeraScale 2 architecture with the Barts chip, built on a 40 nm process. Its 1,700 million transistors spread across a much larger 255 mm² die, resulting in a lower density of 6.7 million transistors per mm².

These architectural generations come with different feature sets. The GCN 1.0 architecture in the FirePro M4150 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The TeraScale 2 architecture in the Radeon HD 6850 X2 is limited to DirectX 11.2 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.4, with no Vulkan support at all. This makes the FirePro M4150 significantly more modern in terms of API compatibility, which could matter for software that leverages newer graphics or compute interfaces.

The physical form factors also reflect their intended environments. The FirePro M4150 is an MXM Module, designed for mobile workstations where space and power are constrained. The Radeon HD 6850 X2 is a dual-slot desktop card with two 8-pin power connectors and a 254 W TDP, indicating it was built for a desktop chassis with substantial power delivery. The FirePro M4150’s display outputs are listed as “Portable Device Dependent,” while the Radeon HD 6850 X2 offers 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.3a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.1.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets for these two cards diverge on nearly every measurable field. The FirePro M4150 operates with a memory clock of 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective), while the Radeon HD 6850 X2 runs its memory at 1050 MHz (4.2 Gbps effective). This small clock advantage, combined with the Radeon’s wider 256-bit bus versus the FirePro’s 128-bit bus, produces a significant bandwidth gap: 134.4 GB/s for the Radeon HD 6850 X2 versus 64.00 GB/s for the FirePro M4150.

Compute resources tell a similar story. The Radeon HD 6850 X2 features 960 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The FirePro M4150 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. These raw counts translate into substantial throughput differences: the Radeon achieves 25.60 GPixel/s and 38.40 GTexel/s, while the FirePro manages only 5.720 GPixel/s and 17.16 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance follows the same pattern, with the Radeon delivering 1.536 TFLOPS compared to the FirePro’s 549.1 GFLOPS.

The bus interfaces also differ. The FirePro M4150 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the Radeon HD 6850 X2 uses the older PCIe 2.0 x16 standard. The Radeon’s dual-slot design and 254 W TDP contrast sharply with the FirePro’s MXM Module form factor and absent TDP listing, reflecting the mobile-versus-desktop divide. The Radeon HD 6850 X2 also lists a suggested PSU of 600 W, while the FirePro M4150 has no such requirement listed.

The Verdict

The benchmark data shows a 0.9% win for the AMD FirePro M4150 in Geekbench OpenCL, with both cards sitting at the 24th percentile among all GPUs. The performance parity is remarkable given the specification gap. The Radeon HD 6850 X2 has 2.5 times the shading units, 4 times the ROPs, 2.8 times the floating-point throughput, and more than double the memory bandwidth. Yet in the compute workload measured by Geekbench OpenCL, these advantages evaporate into a statistical tie.

The choice between these cards should be driven by platform and software compatibility rather than raw performance. The FirePro M4150 is the only viable option for mobile workstations, given its MXM Module form factor and portable-device-dependent display outputs. It also offers modern API support including Vulkan 1.2.170 and DirectX 12 (11_1), which the Radeon HD 6850 X2 lacks entirely. The Radeon HD 6850 X2, conversely, requires a desktop chassis with a 600 W PSU and dual 8-pin connectors, but offers superior raw specifications that could translate into better performance in workloads not captured by the single benchmark result.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro M4150 wins in software compatibility and platform flexibility. Its GCN 1.0 architecture supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, making it suitable for modern applications that leverage these APIs. Its 28 nm process node and 12.3 million transistors per mm² density demonstrate a more efficient design that fits within the thermal and power constraints of a mobile MXM Module. The FirePro M4150 also edges out the Radeon HD 6850 X2 in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark by 0.9%, making it the data-backed winner in that specific test.

The AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 wins on raw hardware specifications. It offers 2 GB of memory versus 1 GB, 134.4 GB/s of bandwidth versus 64.00 GB/s, and significantly higher pixel and texture rates. Its 1.536 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is nearly three times that of the FirePro M4150’s 549.1 GFLOPS. For workloads that can utilize these resources—particularly those that are memory-bandwidth-bound or rely heavily on fill rates—the Radeon HD 6850 X2 has the theoretical advantage. The data does not include a benchmark that captures these strengths, but the specification sheet suggests it would perform strongly in such scenarios. Its PCIe 2.0 x16 interface also provides double the lane width of the FirePro’s PCIe 3.0 x8 connection, which could reduce data transfer bottlenecks in some compute tasks.