AMD FirePro M4150 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only recorded benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the results are unambiguous. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M scores 4855 points, while the AMD FirePro M4150 scores 4013 points. That is a 21% delta in favor of the GTX 560M, which wins the sole head-to-head comparison. The GTX 560M also holds a percentile rank of 28 among all GPUs, compared to the FirePro M4150's 24th percentile, placing it slightly higher in the overall distribution.

Looking at the nearest rival data, the GTX 560M sits in a tight cluster: it is 0.2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 940MX (4844), 0.2% behind the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX (4867), 0.8% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 (4893), and 0.9% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB (4901). The FirePro M4150's nearest rivals show a similar pattern but at lower scores: it trails the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M by 0.5% (4033), leads the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 by 0.9% (3977), leads the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 by 1.2% (3964), and leads the NVIDIA GeForce 830M by 1.4% (3957).

The 21-point percentage gap between the two cards is substantial in this context. The GTX 560M's score places it within a few points of modern and older competitors alike, while the FirePro M4150 is anchored in a lower band. The data does not show any test where the FirePro M4150 wins; the wins column is 1 for the GTX 560M and 0 for the AMD part.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and process nodes. The GTX 560M uses the GF116 chip, built on Fermi 2.0 architecture, manufactured on a 40 nm process at TSMC. It packs 1,170 million transistors into a 238 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 4.9 million per square millimeter. The FirePro M4150 uses the Opal chip, based on GCN 1.0 architecture, also from TSMC but on a 28 nm process. It contains 950 million transistors on a much smaller 77 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. The FirePro M4150 is thus the more modern and denser design, despite being released later.

Memory configurations differ as well. The GTX 560M has 1536 MB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus, with a memory clock of 625 MHz (2.5 Gbps effective) and bandwidth of 60.00 GB/s. The FirePro M4150 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, with a memory clock of 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) and bandwidth of 64.00 GB/s. The FirePro M4150 actually has higher bandwidth despite a narrower bus, thanks to faster memory clocks. The GTX 560M has more memory capacity, which can matter for larger working sets.

Shader and pixel hardware also differ. The GTX 560M has 192 shading units, 32 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 24 render output units (ROPs). The FirePro M4150 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and only 8 ROPs. The GTX 560M's pixel rate is 6.200 GPixel/s versus 5.720 GPixel/s for the FirePro M4150. Texture rates are 24.80 GTexel/s and 17.16 GTexel/s respectively. Floating point performance is close: the GTX 560M delivers 595.2 GFLOPS, while the FirePro M4150 delivers 549.1 GFLOPS. The AMD part has twice the shading units but lower fill rates, reflecting the different architectural priorities of GCN versus Fermi.

Interface and API support also differ. The GTX 560M uses an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface, while the FirePro M4150 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. Both are MXM modules. The GTX 560M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, with no Vulkan listed. The FirePro M4150 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The AMD card has broader API coverage, particularly for Vulkan. The GTX 560M has a 75 W TDP, while the FirePro M4150 does not have a recorded TDP in the database. Neither card has a launch MSRP listed.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 560M wins the only benchmark available, and by a significant margin. Its 21% lead in Geekbench OpenCL suggests a general compute advantage in that test. The higher pixel rate and texture rate also point to advantages in fill-rate-bound workloads. The larger memory pool (1536 MB versus 1024 MB) could help with scenes or datasets that exceed 1 GB, reducing reliance on slower memory spills. The GTX 560M's 24 ROPs versus 8 ROPs is a large gap, which typically favors it in rasterization-heavy tasks like traditional game rendering at lower resolutions.

The FirePro M4150 wins in areas not captured by the single benchmark. Its higher memory bandwidth (64.00 GB/s versus 60.00 GB/s) gives it a slight edge in memory-throughput-bound operations. The faster memory clock (1000 MHz versus 625 MHz) and higher effective data rate (4 Gbps versus 2.5 Gbps) mean it can feed its compute units more quickly. The FirePro M4150 also has twice the shading units (384 versus 192), which in theory helps with highly parallel shader workloads that do not hit memory or output bottlenecks. Its Vulkan support opens up a more modern API path that the GTX 560M lacks.

The process node difference is notable: the FirePro M4150's 28 nm process versus the GTX 560M's 40 nm process means the AMD part is more efficient in terms of transistor density (12.3M / mm² versus 4.9M / mm²). This does not directly translate to benchmark performance, but it suggests a more modern design with potentially better power characteristics, though no TDP is recorded for the FirePro M4150 to confirm that.

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M is the faster GPU in the one test that was run. It leads by 21% in Geekbench OpenCL, holds a higher percentile rank (28 versus 24), and wins the head-to-head matchup 1 to 0. Anyone selecting a GPU for raw compute performance based on this database would choose the GTX 560M without hesitation.

The AMD FirePro M4150 is not without merit, but its advantages are not reflected in benchmark scores. It has a more modern architecture (GCN 1.0 versus Fermi 2.0), a smaller die, higher transistor density, faster memory clock, and additional API support including Vulkan. These are real specification differences that could matter for specific software stacks, particularly those that rely on Vulkan or benefit from the higher memory bandwidth. However, the data does not show any workload where the FirePro M4150 outperforms the GTX 560M.

The choice depends on what the user values. If the priority is the highest recorded OpenCL score, the GTX 560M is the clear pick. If the priority is a more modern feature set, better API coverage, and a denser design, the FirePro M4150 has qualitative advantages, but there is no benchmark evidence that those translate into better performance. The GTX 560M is the stronger performer according to the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M scores 4855, while the AMD FirePro M4150 scores 4013. The GTX 560M is 21% higher.

Q: Does the AMD FirePro M4150 win any benchmark in the database?

A: No. The head-to-head record shows 1 win for the GTX 560M and 0 wins for the FirePro M4150.

Q: Which GPU has more memory?

A: The GTX 560M has 1536 MB of GDDR5, while the FirePro M4150 has 1024 MB of GDDR5.

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The FirePro M4150 has 64.00 GB/s, slightly higher than the GTX 560M's 60.00 GB/s.

Q: Which GPU supports Vulkan?

A: Only the FirePro M4150 lists Vulkan support (version 1.2.170). The GTX 560M does not list a Vulkan version.

Q: What are the process nodes for each GPU?

A: The GTX 560M is on a 40 nm process, and the FirePro M4150 is on a 28 nm process. Both are manufactured by TSMC.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M | AMD FirePro M4150 |

|----------------|-------------------------|-------------------|

| Chip | GF116 | Opal |

| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |

| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 1,170 million | 950 million |

| Die Size | 238 mm² | 77 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 4.9M / mm² | 12.3M / mm² |

| Memory Size | 1536 MB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Bus Width | 192 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Clock | 625 MHz (2.5 Gbps effective) | 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 60.00 GB/s | 64.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 192 | 384 |

| TMUs | 32 | 24 |

| ROPs | 24 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 6.200 GPixel/s | 5.720 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 24.80 GTexel/s | 17.16 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 595.2 GFLOPS | 549.1 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 75 W | Not recorded |

| Bus Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_0) | 12 (11_1) |

| Vulkan Support | Not listed | 1.2.170 |

| Release Date | 2011-05-29 | 2013-10-15 |

| Predecessor | GeForce 400M | FirePro Mobility |

| Successor | GeForce 600M | Radeon Pro Mobile |