GPU Comparison

The AMD FirePro M4150 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 are both end-of-life, 28 nm parts from late 2013, but they target fundamentally different workloads. Benchmark data shows the GTX 650 holds a clear performance lead in the single available comparison, yet the FirePro M4150’s architecture and feature set make it the more versatile choice for professional mobile environments, while the GTX 650 is the straightforward pick for raw compute throughput on a desktop.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous on raw performance: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 wins the only head-to-head benchmark, scoring 4545 in Geekbench OpenCL against the AMD FirePro M4150’s 4013, a decisive 11.7% advantage. If your priority is maximum compute performance in a desktop context, the GTX 650 is the superior choice. However, the FirePro M4150 is not without its own rationale. Its MXM Module form factor and portable-device-dependent display outputs position it as the only option for mobile or embedded systems where a single-slot desktop card physically cannot fit. The GTX 650, with its 147 mm length, requires a standard PCIe slot and a 250 W suggested PSU, making it a desktop-only solution. For a laptop or compact workstation, the FirePro M4150 is the only viable pick from this pair, despite its lower benchmark score.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs diverge sharply in chip design. The AMD FirePro M4150 uses the Opal chip built on GCN 1.0 architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process with 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 12.3M per mm². The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 uses the GK106 chip on Kepler architecture, also TSMC 28 nm, but packs 2,540 million transistors on a much larger 221 mm² die, resulting in a lower density of 11.5M per mm². The GTX 650’s die is nearly three times larger in area and holds over 2.5 times more transistors, explaining its higher shading-unit count and memory throughput.

Both GPUs feature 384 shading units, but the similarity ends there. The GTX 650 has 32 texture mapping units and 16 ROPs, while the FirePro M4150 has 24 TMUs and just 8 ROPs. This directly impacts fill rates: the GTX 650 delivers 8.464 GPixel/s pixel rate and 33.86 GTexel/s texture rate, versus the FirePro’s 5.720 GPixel/s and 17.16 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute figures follow the same trend: 812.5 GFLOPS for the GTX 650 versus 549.1 GFLOPS for the FirePro M4150. The GTX 650 also runs faster memory at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) compared to the FirePro’s 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective), yielding 80.00 GB/s bandwidth versus 64.00 GB/s. Both use 1024 MB GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus.

API support shows a notable difference. The FirePro M4150 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the GTX 650 supports only DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the GTX 650 has a newer Vulkan version (1.2.175) versus the FirePro’s 1.2.170. The FirePro’s higher DirectX feature level is a point in its favor for certain legacy or compatibility-sensitive workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 650 wins decisively in compute performance. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 4545 is 11.7% higher than the FirePro M4150’s 4013. This advantage is consistent with its superior hardware: 812.5 GFLOPS FP32, 80.00 GB/s memory bandwidth, and double the ROP and TMU counts. In any benchmark that stresses raw shader throughput, texture filtering, or pixel fill, the GTX 650 is the clear winner. Its 65 W TDP and single-slot design also make it a modest, manageable desktop card, with a 1x 6-pin power connector and 250 W suggested PSU.

The FirePro M4150 wins in form factor and portability. It is an MXM Module, meaning it is designed for laptops and small-form-factor systems where the GTX 650’s 147 mm length and PCIe 3.0 x16 slot are irrelevant. The FirePro uses PCIe 3.0 x8, which is sufficient for its bandwidth needs, and its display outputs are “Portable Device Dependent,” meaning it adapts to the host laptop’s panel. In mobile workstations, this is the only choice. Additionally, the FirePro’s DirectX 12 (11_1) support is a generation ahead of the GTX 650’s 11_0, which could matter for specific professional or embedded applications that require that feature level.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 scores 4545, which is 11.7% higher than the AMD FirePro M4150’s 4013.

Q: Can the AMD FirePro M4150 be used in a standard desktop PC?

A: No, the FirePro M4150 uses an MXM Module slot width and has portable-device-dependent display outputs, making it exclusive to laptops or specialized systems. The GTX 650 is a single-slot desktop card with a 147 mm length.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The GTX 650 has 80.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the FirePro M4150 has 64.00 GB/s, a 25% advantage for the GTX 650.

Q: Do both GPUs have the same number of shading units?

A: Yes, both have 384 shading units, but the GTX 650 has 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs versus the FirePro’s 24 TMUs and 8 ROPs.

Q: Which GPU supports a newer version of Vulkan?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 supports Vulkan 1.2.175, while the AMD FirePro M4150 supports Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: What is the difference in their transistor counts?

A: The GTX 650 has 2,540 million transistors on a 221 mm² die, while the FirePro M4150 has 950 million on a 77 mm² die.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is a clear win for the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650. The GTX 650 scores 4545 against the FirePro M4150’s 4013, a delta of -11.7% from the FirePro’s perspective. This 532-point gap is substantial and aligns perfectly with the underlying hardware differences. The GTX 650’s FP32 throughput of 812.5 GFLOPS is 48% higher than the FirePro’s 549.1 GFLOPS. Its texture rate of 33.86 GTexel/s is nearly double the FirePro’s 17.16 GTexel/s, and its pixel rate of 8.464 GPixel/s is 48% higher. The memory subsystem also favors the GTX 650, with 80.00 GB/s bandwidth versus 64.00 GB/s.

In terms of overall percentile ranking, the FirePro M4150 sits at the 24th percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 650 sits at the 22nd percentile. This is counterintuitive given the GTX 650’s higher OpenCL score, but it reflects the fact that the GTX 650’s average benchmark score across all tests is 3823, lower than its OpenCL-only result of 4545. The FirePro M4150 has an average score of 4013, which matches its single OpenCL result. The GTX 650 also has additional benchmark results in Metal (2400) and Vulkan (4524), which drag down its average. For pure OpenCL compute, the GTX 650 is the winner, but the FirePro M4150 has a higher average score across all tested workloads.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The FirePro M4150 uses GCN 1.0 architecture on a 77 mm² die with 950 million transistors, while the GTX 650 uses Kepler on a 221 mm² die with 2,540 million transistors. Memory clocks differ: the FirePro runs at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective), the GTX 650 at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective). Bandwidth is 64.00 GB/s for the FirePro versus 80.00 GB/s for the GTX 650. Both have 384 shading units, but the GTX 650 has 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs versus the FirePro’s 24 TMUs and 8 ROPs.

Pixel rate is 5.720 GPixel/s for the FirePro and 8.464 GPixel/s for the GTX 650. Texture rate is 17.16 GTexel/s versus 33.86 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 549.1 GFLOPS versus 812.5 GFLOPS. The FirePro has no TDP listed, while the GTX 650 is rated at 65 W with a 1x 6-pin power connector and a 250 W suggested PSU. The FirePro uses an MXM Module slot width, the GTX 650 is single-slot. Bus interface differs: PCIe 3.0 x8 for the FirePro, PCIe 3.0 x16 for the GTX 650. Display outputs are portable-device-dependent on the FirePro, while the GTX 650 has 1x DVI and 2x DisplayPort 1.2. The GTX 650 has a physical length of 147 mm (5.8 inches). DirectX support is 12 (11_1) for the FirePro and 12 (11_0) for the GTX 650. Vulkan support is 1.2.170 for the FirePro and 1.2.175 for the GTX 650. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The FirePro’s predecessor is FirePro Mobility and successor is Radeon Pro Mobile; the GTX 650’s predecessor is GeForce 500 and successor is GeForce 700.