AMD FirePro M4150 vs Intel HD Graphics 630 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the results favor the AMD FirePro M4150. The FirePro M4150 scores 4013, while the Intel HD Graphics 630 manages 3587. That is a 10.6% deficit for the Intel part, a meaningful gap in raw compute throughput. In absolute terms, the AMD card is roughly 426 points ahead, which places it in a slightly higher performance bracket among the nearest rival group.

Context matters here. The Intel HD Graphics 630's average benchmark score across all tests is 4075, which is actually higher than its OpenCL result alone. That average is buoyed by stronger showings in Geekbench Metal (5099) and Geekbench Vulkan (3540). The FirePro M4150 has no Metal or Vulkan results in the database, so its average benchmark score is simply 4013 — identical to its OpenCL score. This means the Intel part's overall average is 1.5% higher than the AMD part's, even though it loses the single head-to-head test.

The nearest-rival data reinforces the closeness of these two parts. The Intel HD Graphics 630 sits at 1.5% above the AMD FirePro M4150 in average score, and the delta between them is smaller than the delta to several other competitors. For instance, the Intel part is 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB and 1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M. The AMD FirePro M4150, meanwhile, is 0.5% behind the GT 755M and 0.9% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2. Both GPUs occupy the same 24th percentile among all GPUs, meaning they are effectively peers in the broader performance distribution.

The single head-to-head result tells a clear story about compute workloads. In OpenCL, the FirePro M4150's 384 shading units and GCN 1.0 architecture deliver higher raw throughput than the Intel HD Graphics 630's 192 shading units. The FirePro's advantage in FP32 performance — 549.1 GFLOPS versus 384.0 GFLOPS — aligns with its OpenCL victory. The texture rate tells a different tale: the Intel part achieves 24.00 GTexel/s versus the AMD's 17.16 GTexel/s, yet this does not translate into an OpenCL win, suggesting the benchmark is compute-bound rather than texture-bound.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro M4150 wins in raw compute performance, as demonstrated by its 10.6% lead in Geekbench OpenCL. This makes it the stronger choice for workloads that leverage OpenCL acceleration — tasks like general-purpose GPU computing, certain scientific simulations, or any application that offloads parallel math to the GPU. Its higher FP32 throughput (549.1 GFLOPS) and larger shading unit count (384 versus 192) provide a structural advantage in these scenarios. The FirePro also has dedicated GDDR5 memory with 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth, which is a substantial asset for memory-intensive compute tasks compared to the Intel part's system-shared memory with bandwidth listed as "System Dependent."

The Intel HD Graphics 630 wins in API versatility and cross-platform graphics features. It supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the FirePro M4150 only reaches DirectX 12 (11_1). The Intel part also supports Vulkan 1.3, compared to the FirePro's Vulkan 1.2.170. In the Geekbench Metal test, the Intel part scores 5099 — a strong result that indicates solid performance in Apple's Metal API, which the AMD part cannot even run. For users on macOS or iOS development environments, the Intel iGPU is the only viable option of the two.

The Intel part also wins in texture processing. Its 24.00 GTexel/s texture rate exceeds the FirePro's 17.16 GTexel/s, even though the AMD card has a higher pixel rate (5.720 GPixel/s versus 3.000 GPixel/s). This suggests the Intel part handles texture-heavy workloads relatively better, though its lower pixel rate means it will lag in fill-rate-bound scenarios. The Intel HD Graphics 630 also has a significantly lower power envelope at 15 W, whereas the FirePro M4150's TDP is not listed in the data — making the Intel part the more predictable choice for thermally constrained systems.

For gaming and general multimedia, neither part is a champion, but the Intel iGPU's broader API support and higher average benchmark score (4075 versus 4013) give it a slight edge in compatibility and driver maturity across different workloads. The AMD part's higher pixel rate and dedicated memory make it better suited for older DirectX 11 titles that do not heavily utilize compute shaders.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel HD Graphics 630 has an average benchmark score of 4075, which is 1.5% higher than the AMD FirePro M4150's score of 4013.

Q: How much faster is the AMD FirePro M4150 in OpenCL?

A: The FirePro M4150 scores 4013 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the Intel HD Graphics 630 scores 3587, giving the AMD part a 10.6% lead.

Q: Does the Intel HD Graphics 630 support Vulkan?

A: Yes, it supports Vulkan 1.3. The AMD FirePro M4150 supports an older Vulkan version, 1.2.170.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each GPU?

A: The AMD FirePro M4150 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel HD Graphics 630 uses system-shared memory with no dedicated VRAM, and its bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent."

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD FirePro M4150 has 384 shading units, double the 192 shading units found on the Intel HD Graphics 630.

Q: Are these GPUs still in production?

A: No, both are end-of-life products. The Intel HD Graphics 630 was released on 2016-08-29, and the AMD FirePro M4150 was released on 2013-10-15.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every core specification. The Intel HD Graphics 630 is built on a 14 nm++ process by Intel, while the AMD FirePro M4150 uses a 28 nm process from TSMC. The AMD chip contains 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die with a transistor density of 12.3M / mm²; the Intel die size and transistor count are not listed.

Clock speeds are fundamentally different. The Intel part has a base clock of 350 MHz and a boost clock of 1000 MHz. The AMD part has no base or boost clock listed, but its memory runs at 1000 MHz with 4 Gbps effective. The Intel GPU's memory is system-shared with no dedicated size, type, or bus width beyond "System Shared," whereas the FirePro M4150 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus.

Compute resources differ substantially. The AMD card has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, versus the Intel's 192 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 3 ROPs. The pixel rate is 5.720 GPixel/s for AMD and 3.000 GPixel/s for Intel. The texture rate is 17.16 GTexel/s for AMD and 24.00 GTexel/s for Intel. FP32 performance is 549.1 GFLOPS for AMD and 384.0 GFLOPS for Intel, while the Intel part also lists FP16 at 768.0 GFLOPS (2:1) with no equivalent for AMD.

Form factors and interfaces also differ. The Intel part is an IGP with a Ring Bus interface and display outputs that are motherboard dependent. The AMD part is an MXM Module with a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface and display outputs that are portable device dependent. The Intel part has a TDP of 15 W, while the AMD TDP is not listed. API support differs in DirectX (12_1 for Intel versus 11_1 for AMD) and Vulkan (1.3 versus 1.2.170), though both support OpenGL 4.6.

Architecture Differences

The Intel HD Graphics 630 is based on the Kaby Lake GT2 chip using Intel's Generation 9.5 architecture. The AMD FirePro M4150 uses the Opal chip with AMD's GCN 1.0 architecture. These are fundamentally different design philosophies: Intel's Gen 9.5 is a unified graphics architecture integrated into the CPU die, while GCN 1.0 is a discrete GPU architecture designed for parallel compute efficiency.

The process node difference is significant. Intel uses 14 nm++ while AMD uses 28 nm, giving Intel a density and power efficiency advantage. This is reflected in the Intel part's 15 W TDP, though the AMD TDP is not disclosed. The Intel chip is manufactured at Intel's own foundry, while the AMD chip is produced by TSMC.

Shading architecture diverges sharply. The AMD GCN 1.0 design uses 384 shading units arranged in a compute-oriented layout, which explains its higher FP32 throughput despite a lower texture rate. The Intel Gen 9.5 architecture uses 192 shading units but achieves a higher texture rate (24.00 GTexel/s versus 17.16 GTexel/s), suggesting a different balance between texture and compute resources.

Memory architecture is another major differentiator. The AMD FirePro M4150 has dedicated GDDR5 memory with a 128-bit bus and 64.00 GB/s bandwidth, a classic discrete GPU setup. The Intel HD Graphics 630 relies on system-shared memory with bandwidth dependent on the host system, which is typical for integrated graphics. This affects not just performance but also memory latency and consistency under load.

The API feature set reflects the architectural generations. Intel's newer architecture supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3, while AMD's GCN 1.0 from the FirePro Mx100 generation is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The Intel part also has FP16 support at 768.0 GFLOPS (2:1), which is absent from the AMD specification list — a notable difference for workloads that can utilize half-precision math.

The production timeline also differs. The Intel HD Graphics 630 was released on 2016-08-29, while the AMD FirePro M4150 predates it by nearly three years, with a release date of 2013-10-15. The AMD part's predecessor is "FirePro Mobility" and its successor is "Radeon Pro Mobile," while the Intel part has no listed predecessor or successor. Both are end-of-life products, but the Intel part is from a more recent architectural generation with correspondingly newer feature support.