AMD FirePro M4150 vs NVIDIA GeForce 830M Comparison

The AMD FirePro M4150 and NVIDIA GeForce 830M are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions from the 2013–2014 era, targeting different segments of the laptop market. The FirePro M4150 is a workstation-oriented part based on AMD’s GCN 1.0 architecture, while the 830M is a consumer-focused chip built on NVIDIA’s Maxwell architecture. Both cards share the same 28 nm TSMC process node and similar die sizes, but their benchmark results and architectural philosophies diverge in meaningful ways. The data provided includes one head-to-head benchmark, several nearest-rival comparisons, and full specification listings, which together paint a clear picture of how these two GPUs compare.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are decisive. The NVIDIA GeForce 830M scores 4324, while the AMD FirePro M4150 scores 4013. That gives the 830M a 7.2% advantage in this workload, which is a substantial margin for a single test. The deltaPct is listed from the FirePro’s perspective as -7.2%, confirming that the AMD part trails its rival by that exact amount.

Looking at the broader context of the nearest rivals for each card reinforces this gap. The FirePro M4150’s own nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M (score 4033, delta -0.5%) and the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 (score 3977, delta 0.9%). The 830M appears in that list with a score of 3957 and a delta of 1.4%, meaning the FirePro is actually slightly ahead of the 830M when using the average benchmark score across multiple tests. This is an important distinction: the FirePro’s average score (4013) is higher than the 830M’s average (3957), yet the 830M wins the single head-to-head OpenCL run by 7.2%. The explanation lies in the fact that the 830M’s average is pulled down by its Vulkan score of 3590, while its OpenCL score of 4324 is its strong suit.

The GeForce 830M’s nearest rivals also show how close the field is. Its list includes the AMD Radeon R5 M420 (score 3956, delta 0%), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M (score 3953, delta 0.1%), and the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 (score 3964, delta -0.2%). These deltas are all within a fraction of a percent, indicating that the 830M sits in a very tight cluster of mid-range mobile GPUs. The FirePro M4150, by contrast, has a slightly wider spread among its rivals, with deltas ranging from -0.5% to 1.2%. This suggests that the FirePro is more of an outlier relative to its closest competitors, while the 830M is very much in the middle of the pack.

In terms of raw compute, the data shows the 830M has a higher FP32 throughput at 588.8 GFLOPS compared to the FirePro’s 549.1 GFLOPS, which is a 7.2% difference that mirrors the OpenCL result. The 830M also leads in pixel rate (9.200 GPixel/s vs 5.720 GPixel/s) and texture rate (18.40 GTexel/s vs 17.16 GTexel/s). These numbers align with the benchmark outcome, suggesting that the 830M’s advantage is consistent across both synthetic tests and theoretical peak rates.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the data, the NVIDIA GeForce 830M is the faster GPU in the one benchmark where both are measured. Its OpenCL score of 4324 beats the FirePro M4150’s 4013 by 7.2%, and it also holds leads in FP32, pixel rate, and texture rate. The 830M’s Vulkan score of 3590 provides additional evidence of its capability, though no Vulkan result is available for the FirePro. For anyone prioritizing raw compute performance in OpenCL workloads, the 830M is the clear choice.

However, the FirePro M4150 is not without its merits. Its average benchmark score of 4013 is actually higher than the 830M’s average of 3957, a difference of 1.4%. This is because the FirePro has no Vulkan score dragging down its average, while the 830M’s Vulkan result of 3590 is significantly lower than its OpenCL result. If a workload relies on average performance across multiple APIs, the FirePro holds a slight edge. Additionally, the FirePro’s nearest rival list includes the 830M with a positive delta of 1.4%, meaning the FirePro outperforms the 830M in that specific comparison.

For system builders, the choice depends on the workload. The 830M wins the head-to-head OpenCL test and offers higher peak rates, making it better suited for general-purpose compute and gaming. The FirePro M4150, as a workstation part, offers a more consistent average score and supports DirectX 12 (11_1) compared to the 830M’s DirectX 12 (11_0), which could matter for certain professional applications. The FirePro also has a higher OpenGL version (4.6 for both, so no difference there) and a newer Vulkan version (1.2.170 vs 1.4), though the 830M’s Vulkan support is numerically higher. Ultimately, the 830M is the better pick for raw performance, while the FirePro is a safer bet for consistent multi-API averages.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures. The AMD FirePro M4150 uses GCN 1.0, AMD’s first-generation Graphics Core Next design, which was a significant departure from the older VLIW architecture. The chip is codenamed Opal and belongs to the FirePro Mobile (Mx100) generation. In contrast, the NVIDIA GeForce 830M uses Maxwell, NVIDIA’s second-generation architecture after Kepler, with the chip codenamed GM108 from the GeForce 800M generation.

The process nodes are identical: both are fabricated on 28 nm at TSMC. The die sizes are also the same at 77 mm², but the transistor counts differ slightly. The FirePro M4150 has 950 million transistors, resulting in a transistor density of 12.3M / mm². The 830M has 1,020 million transistors, giving it a density of 13.2M / mm². This means the 830M packs about 7% more transistors into the same die area, which explains some of its performance advantage.

The compute units are organized differently. The FirePro M4150 has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. The 830M has fewer shading units at 256, fewer TMUs at 16, but the same 8 ROPs. Despite having fewer shading units, the 830M achieves higher FP32 throughput due to its higher clock speeds. The FirePro’s clock speeds are not listed, but the 830M has a base clock of 1082 MHz and a boost clock of 1150 MHz. The FirePro’s memory clock is 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective), while the 830M’s memory clock is 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective).

Memory configurations are markedly different. The FirePro M4150 uses 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 64.00 GB/s. The 830M uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, which yields only 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a massive difference: the FirePro has over 4 times the memory bandwidth of the 830M. However, the 830M compensates with superior compute rates, as evidenced by its higher FP32 and texture rates. Both use a PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface and have display outputs that are Portable Device Dependent.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 830M scores 4324 on Geekbench OpenCL, which is 7.2% higher than the AMD FirePro M4150’s score of 4013.

Q: How does the average benchmark score compare between the two?

A: The FirePro M4150 has an average benchmark score of 4013, while the 830M averages 3957. The FirePro is 1.4% ahead of the 830M based on average scores, as shown in the nearest rivals list.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each GPU offer?

A: The FirePro M4150 has a memory bandwidth of 64.00 GB/s using GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. The 830M has 14.40 GB/s using DDR3 on a 64-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD FirePro M4150 has 384 shading units, while the NVIDIA GeForce 830M has 256 shading units.

Q: What is the transistor density of each chip?

A: The FirePro M4150 has a transistor density of 12.3M / mm² with 950 million transistors. The 830M has a density of 13.2M / mm² with 1,020 million transistors.

Q: Does the 830M support Vulkan?

A: Yes, the NVIDIA GeForce 830M has a Vulkan score of 3590 and supports Vulkan version 1.4. The FirePro M4150 supports Vulkan 1.2.170 but has no Vulkan benchmark score listed.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce 830M wins in the head-to-head OpenCL benchmark, scoring 4324 versus 4013. It also leads in peak theoretical rates: FP32 at 588.8 GFLOPS (vs 549.1 GFLOPS), pixel rate at 9.200 GPixel/s (vs 5.720 GPixel/s), and texture rate at 18.40 GTexel/s (vs 17.16 GTexel/s). The 830M’s higher base and boost clocks (1082 MHz and 1150 MHz) contribute to these wins, as does its larger transistor count of 1,020 million. For compute-heavy tasks that rely on OpenCL, the 830M is the superior choice.

The AMD FirePro M4150 wins in memory bandwidth, offering 64.00 GB/s compared to the 830M’s 14.40 GB/s. It also has a higher average benchmark score of 4013 versus 3957, thanks to the 830M’s lower Vulkan score of 3590. The FirePro has more shading units (384 vs 256) and a wider memory bus (128-bit vs 64-bit). Its support for DirectX 12 (11_1) is one version newer than the 830M’s DirectX 12 (11_0). For workloads that are bandwidth-bound or that benefit from a wider memory interface, the FirePro has the edge.

Specification Differences

The key specification differences between the two GPUs are as follows. The process node is the same (28 nm, TSMC), and the die size is identical (77 mm²), but the transistor counts differ: 950 million for the FirePro M4150 versus 1,020 million for the 830M. The 830M has listed base and boost clocks (1082 MHz and 1150 MHz), while the FirePro has no base or boost clock listed. Memory differs significantly: the FirePro uses 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, while the 830M uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus. The FirePro’s memory clock is 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective), while the 830M’s is 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective).

Shading units are 384 for the FirePro versus 256 for the 830M. Texture mapping units are 24 vs 16, and ROPs are equal at 8. The FirePro’s pixel rate is 5.720 GPixel/s versus the 830M’s 9.200 GPixel/s; texture rates are 17.16 GTexel/s vs 18.40 GTexel/s; FP32 is 549.1 GFLOPS vs 588.8 GFLOPS. The 830M has a TDP of 33 W, while the FirePro has no TDP listed. The 830M is an IGP with no power connectors, while the FirePro is an MXM Module. Both support DirectX 12, but the FirePro is at 11_1 and the 830M at 11_0. OpenGL is 4.6 for both, while Vulkan support differs: 1.2.170 for the FirePro and 1.4 for the 830M. Finally, the FirePro was released on 2013-10-15, while the 830M came later on 2014-03-11.