AMD FirePro M4150 vs AMD Radeon R5 M230 Comparison

AMD Radeon R5 M230 vs AMD FirePro M4150: both are end-of-life mobile GPUs built on GCN 1.0, but the data shows they target different corners of the laptop market. The R5 M230 is an integrated-class part from the R5 M200 family, while the FirePro M4150 is a workstation-oriented MXM module from the FirePro Mobile Mx100 line. The benchmark results place them close in the overall GPU hierarchy, yet their architectural and memory setups create distinct performance profiles.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only recorded head-to-head comparison in the database is the Geekbench OpenCL test. In that test, the AMD Radeon R5 M230 scores 4577, while the AMD FirePro M4150 scores 4013. The R5 M230 wins by 14.1%, a clear margin that is not a rounding error. This is the single benchmark result available, and it favors the R5 M230 decisively.

Context from the nearest rivals helps interpret this score. The R5 M230 sits at the 27th percentile among all GPUs. Its closest competitors in the database are the AMD Radeon RX 560, which scores 4569 (a 0.2% delta), and the Intel HD Graphics P530, which scores 4560 (a 0.4% delta). The R5 M230 is also within 0.9% of the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M (4621) and 1.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M (4628). This means the R5 M230 is not an outlier; it sits in a cluster of GPUs that all land near the 4577 mark. The 14.1% lead over the FirePro M4150 is the largest delta in either card's rival list.

The FirePro M4150, by contrast, sits at the 24th percentile. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M, which scores 4033 (a -0.5% delta), the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 at 3977 (0.9% delta), the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 at 3964 (1.2% delta), and the NVIDIA GeForce 830M at 3957 (1.4% delta). The FirePro M4150's score of 4013 places it slightly below the GeForce GT 755M but above the other three rivals. The gap between the two cards in question is substantial: 564 points on the OpenCL scale, translating to that 14.1% advantage.

What is notable is that the R5 M230 achieves this win despite having fewer raw compute resources. The R5 M230 has 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 raster operations units. The FirePro M4150 has more: 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The FirePro M4150 also has a higher theoretical peak: 549.1 GFLOPS FP32 versus 390.4 GFLOPS for the R5 M230. The texture rate is 17.16 GTexel/s versus 12.20 GTexel/s, and the pixel rate is 5.720 GPixel/s versus 4.880 GPixel/s. Yet in the actual OpenCL workload, the R5 M230 comes out ahead. This suggests the benchmark is sensitive to memory bandwidth and access patterns rather than raw shader throughput.

The Verdict

The data points to one clear answer for general OpenCL workloads: the AMD Radeon R5 M230 is the faster card. It wins the only head-to-head test by 14.1%, a significant margin. It also holds a higher percentile ranking (27th versus 24th), which indicates it performs better relative to the entire GPU population in the database.

The FirePro M4150 is not without merit, but its advantages are not reflected in the benchmark score. It has more shading units, more TMUs, double the memory bandwidth (64.00 GB/s versus 16.00 GB/s), and faster memory (GDDR5 at 4 Gbps effective versus DDR3 at 2 Gbps effective). Those specifications suggest it should be faster in memory-bound tasks, yet the Geekbench OpenCL result contradicts that expectation. The R5 M230 wins where it matters in the recorded data.

For a buyer making a choice strictly from the database, the R5 M230 is the pick for raw OpenCL performance. The FirePro M4150 might appeal to someone who needs a workstation-class MXM module with a specific form factor, but the benchmark evidence does not support choosing it on performance grounds.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R5 M230 wins in the only recorded benchmark, the Geekbench OpenCL test. It also wins on percentile placement, sitting at 27th versus 24th for the FirePro M4150. If the use case is general compute acceleration as measured by OpenCL, the R5 M230 is the stronger option.

The AMD FirePro M4150 wins on paper specifications that are not backed by the benchmark score. It has a larger die (77 mm² versus 56 mm²), more transistors (950 million versus 690 million), more shading units, more TMUs, and a wider memory bus (128 bit versus 64 bit). Its memory bandwidth is 4 times higher (64.00 GB/s versus 16.00 GB/s). Those are the specs of a card that should handle memory-heavy workloads better, but the database does not include a test that confirms this. If such a workload were present, the FirePro M4150's GDDR5 memory and higher fill rates would likely favor it. But that is an inference from specifications, not a measured result.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M230 scores 4577, which is 14.1% higher than the AMD FirePro M4150's score of 4013.

Q: How does the R5 M230 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The R5 M230 scores 4577, which is 0.2% above the AMD Radeon RX 560 (4569) and 0.4% above the Intel HD Graphics P530 (4560). It is 0.9% below the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M (4621) and 1.1% below the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M (4628).

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The R5 M230 has 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, yielding 16.00 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro M4150 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding 64.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The FirePro M4150 has 384 shading units, while the R5 M230 has 320 shading units.

Q: What are the production statuses of these cards?

A: Both are listed as end-of-life in the database.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on the same GCN 1.0 architecture and use a 28 nm process node at TSMC. The transistor density is identical at 12.3M per mm², which makes sense given the same node and architecture. The differences start at the chip level. The R5 M230 uses the Jet chip, while the FirePro M4150 uses the Opal chip. Jet is smaller: 56 mm² with 690 million transistors. Opal is larger: 77 mm² with 950 million transistors. That is a 37.5% larger die and a 37.7% higher transistor count for the FirePro M4150.

The generation labels differ. The R5 M230 belongs to the Gem System (R5 M200) family, while the FirePro M4150 belongs to the FirePro Mobile (Mx100) family. The production status is end-of-life for both, but the release dates differ: the R5 M230 launched in 2014, and the FirePro M4150 launched in 2013. The R5 M230 lists its predecessor as Solar System and its successor as Polaris Mobile. The FirePro M4150 lists its predecessor as FirePro Mobility and its successor as Radeon Pro Mobile.

The slot width is a notable architectural difference in practical terms. The R5 M230 is an IGP (integrated graphics processor), meaning it is designed to be part of a portable device with no discrete module. The FirePro M4150 is an MXM module, a removable card standard for laptops. Both have a PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface, and both have display outputs that are portable device dependent.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every compute specification except ROPs and API support. The R5 M230 has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The FirePro M4150 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The FirePro M4150 leads in theoretical throughput: FP32 is 549.1 GFLOPS versus 390.4 GFLOPS, texture rate is 17.16 GTexel/s versus 12.20 GTexel/s, and pixel rate is 5.720 GPixel/s versus 4.880 GPixel/s.

Memory is where the gap is largest. The R5 M230 has 2 GB of DDR3, a 64-bit bus, and 16.00 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro M4150 has 1024 MB of GDDR5, a 128-bit bus, and 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock is listed as 1000 MHz for both, but the effective rate differs: 2 Gbps for the R5 M230 and 4 Gbps for the FirePro M4150. The FirePro M4150's memory bandwidth is exactly 4 times higher.

The physical and platform specs also differ. The R5 M230 is an IGP, while the FirePro M4150 is an MXM module. Both use PCIe 3.0 x8. The die size and transistor counts are different, as covered above. The release dates differ by roughly three months, with the FirePro M4150 coming first. Neither card has a launch MSRP recorded in the database, and neither has a TDP, power connector, or suggested PSU value listed. Both cards support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The R5 M230 sits at the 27th percentile, the FirePro M4150 at the 24th, and the only benchmark result favors the R5 M230 by 14.1%.