AMD FirePro M4150 vs AMD Radeon R6 M255DX Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD FirePro M4150 and AMD Radeon R6 M255DX are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions built on the same GCN 1.0 architecture and 28 nm TSMC process, but they target fundamentally different use cases. The recorded data shows the FirePro M4150 is a discrete MXM module aimed at professional mobile workstations, while the R6 M255DX is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) designed for hybrid systems in consumer laptops.

Based on benchmark results, the R6 M255DX holds the performance edge. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 4867 places it in the 28th percentile of all GPUs, while the FirePro M4150’s Geekbench OpenCL score of 4013 lands in the 24th percentile. That is a meaningful gap of roughly 21% in favor of the R6 M255DX, and it translates directly into which users should pick which part.

The FirePro M4150 is the choice for users who need a dedicated, replaceable graphics module with its own VRAM. Its 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus delivers 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth, which is essential for professional workloads that rely on local memory access. The R6 M255DX, by contrast, shares system memory, making its bandwidth "System Dependent", a wildcard that can vary wildly based on the host laptop’s RAM configuration.

The R6 M255DX is the better pick for users who want raw compute performance in a power-efficient, integrated form factor. It delivers higher pixel throughput at 6.840 GPixel/s versus 5.720 GPixel/s for the FirePro M4150, and it does so without requiring a dedicated MXM slot. For a hybrid system where the GPU works alongside a CPU’s integrated graphics, the R6 M255DX’s higher clock speeds (780 MHz base, 855 MHz boost) give it a clear performance advantage.

In short: choose the FirePro M4150 for professional mobile workstations that need dedicated VRAM and a serviceable module. Choose the R6 M255DX for consumer laptops where integrated graphics and higher compute scores are the priority.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the same GCN 1.0 architecture and are fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process node. They also share the same transistor density of 12.3M per mm², which is expected given the identical process technology.

The silicon itself differs substantially. The FirePro M4150 uses the Opal chip, which packs 950 million transistors into a 77 mm² die. The R6 M255DX uses the Jet chip, which is smaller at 56 mm² and contains 690 million transistors. This means the FirePro M4150 has roughly 38% more transistors and a 38% larger die, but the R6 M255DX achieves higher benchmark scores despite the smaller silicon.

The compute unit configurations reflect this difference. The FirePro M4150 has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 8 render output units (ROPs). The R6 M255DX has 320 shading units and 20 TMUs, but it matches the FirePro M4150 with 8 ROPs. Despite having fewer shading units and TMUs, the R6 M255DX still posts higher pixel and texture rates: 6.840 GPixel/s versus 5.720 GPixel/s, and 17.10 GTexel/s versus 17.16 GTexel/s. The texture rates are nearly identical, but the pixel rate advantage for the R6 M255DX comes from its higher clock speeds.

The FirePro M4150 has no listed base or boost clock, but its memory runs at 1000 MHz with 4 Gbps effective speed. The R6 M255DX has a base clock of 780 MHz and a boost clock of 855 MHz, with system-shared memory. This clock advantage is likely the primary reason the R6 M255DX outperforms the FirePro M4150 in compute tasks, despite having fewer cores.

Memory architecture is a major differentiator. The FirePro M4150 uses 1024 MB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering a fixed 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The R6 M255DX uses system-shared memory, meaning its bandwidth is entirely dependent on the host system’s RAM configuration. This makes the FirePro M4150 far more predictable in memory-constrained professional applications.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The FirePro M4150 connects via PCIe 3.0 x8 and uses an MXM Module slot, while the R6 M255DX is an IGP with no bus interface beyond the integrated graphics path. The FirePro M4150 is part of the FirePro Mobile (Mx100) generation, while the R6 M255DX belongs to the Gem System Hybrid (Rx M200) generation. The FirePro M4150’s predecessor is FirePro Mobility and its successor is Radeon Pro Mobile; the R6 M255DX has no recorded predecessor or successor.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two GPUs were tested with different benchmark suites. The FirePro M4150 has a Geekbench OpenCL score of 4013, while the R6 M255DX has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 4867. Directly comparing these raw numbers is not apples-to-apples, but they are the only recorded measurements available, and the percentile rankings provide a useful normalization.

In percentile terms, the R6 M255DX sits at the 28th percentile of all GPUs, while the FirePro M4150 sits at the 24th. This means the R6 M255DX outperforms a larger share of the GPU population, confirming its overall performance advantage despite the different benchmark APIs.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each GPU adds context. The FirePro M4150’s closest competitor is the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M, which scores 4033, putting the FirePro M4150 just 0.5% behind. The AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 scores 3977, which the FirePro M4150 beats by 0.9%. The NVIDIA Quadro K2000 scores 3964, and the FirePro M4150 leads it by 1.2%. The NVIDIA GeForce 830M scores 3957, and the FirePro M4150 leads by 1.4%. These are tight margins, indicating the FirePro M4150 is a solid mid-range mobile GPU for its era.

The R6 M255DX’s nearest rivals show a similar pattern. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M scores 4855, and the R6 M255DX leads by 0.2%. The NVIDIA GeForce 940MX scores 4844, and the R6 M255DX leads by 0.5%. The NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 scores 4893, putting the R6 M255DX 0.5% behind. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB scores 4901, and the R6 M255DX trails by 0.7%. So the R6 M255DX is competitive with a range of GPUs from different generations, including a modern RTX card, which is remarkable for an integrated part.

The biggest win for the R6 M255DX is its sheer benchmark score: 4867 versus 4013 for the FirePro M4150, a difference of 854 points, or roughly 21%. The biggest win for the FirePro M4150 is its dedicated memory bandwidth: 64.00 GB/s on GDDR5 versus the R6 M255DX’s system-shared memory, which has no fixed bandwidth figure. For workloads that are memory-bound, the FirePro M4150’s predictable bandwidth is a clear advantage.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX scores 4867 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the AMD FirePro M4150 scores 4013 in Geekbench OpenCL. The R6 M255DX also holds a higher percentile ranking at 28th versus 24th.

Q: Do these GPUs use the same architecture?

A: Yes, both use GCN 1.0 architecture fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. They also share the same transistor density of 12.3M per mm² and support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: What are the main differences in memory configuration?

A: The FirePro M4150 has 1024 MB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. The R6 M255DX uses system-shared memory, so its size, type, bus width, and bandwidth are all system-dependent.

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

A: The FirePro M4150 is within 1.4% of its nearest rivals, ranging from 0.5% behind the GeForce GT 755M to 1.4% ahead of the GeForce 830M. The R6 M255DX is within 0.7% of its nearest rivals, ranging from 0.5% behind the GTS 450 to 0.5% ahead of the GeForce 940MX.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The FirePro M4150 has 384 shading units, while the R6 M255DX has 320. The FirePro M4150 also has 24 TMUs versus 20, but both have 8 ROPs.

Q: What is the form factor difference?

A: The FirePro M4150 is an MXM Module with a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, making it a replaceable discrete card. The R6 M255DX is an IGP, meaning it is integrated into the system with no separate card or bus interface.

Where Each One Wins

The R6 M255DX wins in raw compute performance. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 4867 is roughly 21% higher than the FirePro M4150’s Geekbench OpenCL score of 4013. It also achieves a higher pixel rate at 6.840 GPixel/s versus 5.720 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 17.10 GTexel/s is nearly identical to the FirePro M4150’s 17.16 GTexel/s. The R6 M255DX’s boost clock of 855 MHz gives it a frequency advantage that compensates for its fewer shading units.

The R6 M255DX also wins on integration flexibility. As an IGP, it requires no dedicated MXM slot, no PCIe connection, and no separate VRAM allocation. It simply shares system memory, which can be an advantage in thin-and-light laptops where space and power are at a premium. Its higher percentile ranking (28th versus 24th) confirms it is the better-performing part in the database’s overall GPU hierarchy.

The FirePro M4150 wins in memory reliability and professional workstation suitability. Its 1024 MB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus delivers a fixed 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a critical advantage for professional applications where memory bandwidth is a bottleneck and where sharing system memory with the CPU can cause unpredictable performance. The FirePro M4150 also belongs to a professional product line, with a FirePro Mobile (Mx100) generation, a predecessor in FirePro Mobility, and a successor in Radeon Pro Mobile. This lineage indicates a focus on workstation-class drivers and certifications.

The FirePro M4150 also wins on raw transistor count and die size. It packs 950 million transistors into a 77 mm² die, versus 690 million transistors in a 56 mm² die for the R6 M255DX. While this does not translate into higher benchmark scores, it suggests a more complex design that may handle certain professional workloads differently.

In practical terms, the R6 M255DX is the winner for consumer computing, everyday graphics, and any workload that benefits from higher compute throughput. The FirePro M4150 is the winner for professional mobile workstations that need dedicated VRAM, a replaceable MXM module, and the predictable memory bandwidth that comes with a discrete GDDR5 solution. The data does not show a single universal winner; it shows two parts optimized for different priorities, with the R6 M255DX holding the performance crown and the FirePro M4150 holding the reliability crown for memory-bound professional tasks.