GPU Comparison

The AMD FirePro W4190M and AMD FirePro W2100 are both end-of-life professional GPUs built on the same GCN 1.0 architecture, but they target different segments: one is a mobile MXM module, the other a desktop single-slot card. Benchmark data shows a clear, if modest, performance hierarchy between them, with the mobile part taking the lead in compute workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it favors the AMD FirePro W4190M decisively. The W4190M scores 4505 points, while the W2100 scores 4093 points. This translates to a delta of 10.1% in favor of the mobile part. For context, this gap is significant enough to be noticeable in compute-heavy tasks that leverage OpenCL acceleration, such as rendering or data processing, but it is not a generational leap.

The W4190M’s advantage is rooted in its higher clock speeds and a larger execution resource pool. Its base clock of 825 MHz and boost clock of 900 MHz are substantially higher than the W2100’s 630 MHz base and 680 MHz boost. Combined with 384 shading units versus the W2100’s 320, the W4190M delivers 691.2 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, compared to the W2100’s 435.2 GFLOPS. That is a 58.8% raw compute advantage on paper, though the actual benchmark delta is smaller, indicating memory bandwidth and other bottlenecks play a role.

Interestingly, the W2100 counters with a Vulkan score of 4497 in its own benchmark suite. While this is not a head-to-head test against the W4190M (which lacks a Vulkan score), it shows that the W2100 is capable in modern APIs. The W2100’s average benchmark score across OpenCL and Vulkan is 4295, which is still below the W4190M’s single OpenCL score of 4505.

In terms of relative standing, both cards sit near the bottom of the GPU hierarchy. The W4190M holds a 26th percentile ranking among all GPUs, while the W2100 sits at the 25th percentile. Their nearest rivals confirm this positioning. The W4190M is virtually tied with the AMD Radeon R7 M260 (delta 0.1%) and trails the Intel HD Graphics P530 by 1.2%. The W2100 is similarly clustered, being within 0.3% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M and within 1.3% of the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M. Neither card is competitive with even mid-range consumer parts; the AMD Radeon RX 560, for instance, is 1.4% ahead of the W4190M.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process node, and both use the GCN 1.0 architecture. The transistor count is identical at 950 million, and the die size is the same at 77 mm², resulting in a matching transistor density of 12.3M / mm². The underlying chip designs, however, differ: the W4190M uses the Opal chip, while the W2100 uses the Oland chip. This explains the resource disparity despite the identical manufacturing process.

The compute unit configuration diverges significantly. The W4190M packs 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 8 render output units (ROPs). The W2100 is trimmed down to 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and the same 8 ROPs. This affects throughput directly: the W4190M achieves a pixel rate of 7.200 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 21.60 GTexel/s, whereas the W2100 manages only 5.440 GPixel/s and 13.60 GTexel/s, respectively.

Memory is another major differentiator. Both cards have 2 GB of VRAM on a 128-bit bus, but the memory type and speed differ. The W4190M uses GDDR5 at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective), yielding a bandwidth of 64.00 GB/s. The W2100 uses DDR3 at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), which gives just 28.80 GB/s. This 2.2x bandwidth advantage for the W4190M is critical for memory-bound workloads and explains why its compute lead is larger than the clock speed difference alone would suggest.

The API support is identical: both support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The bus interface is also the same, with both using PCIe 3.0 x8. Power characteristics differ, however. The W2100 is rated at a 26 W TDP and requires a 200 W suggested PSU, while the W4190M has no listed TDP, reflecting its mobile design. The physical form factors are distinct: the W4190M is an MXM Module, and the W2100 is a Single-slot card measuring 168 mm in length and 69 mm in height.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The AMD FirePro W4190M. It delivers 691.2 GFLOPS of FP32 performance compared to 435.2 GFLOPS for the W2100, a 58.8% advantage.

Q: Is the memory bandwidth difference significant?

A: Yes. The W4190M uses GDDR5 with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the W2100 uses DDR3 with 28.80 GB/s. This 2.2x difference directly impacts memory-intensive workloads.

Q: Do both cards support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes. Both support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient?

A: The data does not provide a TDP for the W4190M, but the W2100 is rated at 26 W. The W4190M is a mobile MXM module, so its power envelope is likely constrained by laptop design, but no exact figure is available.

Q: How do these cards compare to a modern entry-level GPU?

A: Neither is competitive. The W4190M is 1.4% behind the AMD Radeon RX 560, and the W2100 is 0.9% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6, despite those being far newer and more powerful parts.

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The W4190M, with an average score of 4505, versus 4295 for the W2100. However, the W2100’s average includes a Vulkan score of 4497, which is close to the W4190M’s OpenCL result.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the AMD FirePro W4190M is the faster GPU for compute tasks. Its 10.1% lead in OpenCL, combined with nearly double the memory bandwidth and a 58.8% higher FP32 throughput, makes it the clear choice for workloads that can utilize these resources. The W4190M’s higher clock speeds and additional shading units provide a tangible, measurable advantage.

That said, the W2100 is not without merit. Its Vulkan score of 4497 is nearly on par with the W4190M’s OpenCL score, suggesting it can handle modern API workloads efficiently. Its single-slot, low-profile form factor (168 mm length, 69 mm height) and 26 W TDP make it easier to integrate into small desktop workstations. The W2100 also has defined display outputs (2x DisplayPort 1.2), whereas the W4190M’s outputs are listed as “Portable Device Dependent,” meaning the mobile card’s connectivity is dictated by the laptop’s design.

For a fixed workstation, the W2100’s ease of integration and predictable power draw are advantages. For a mobile workstation where compute density matters, the W4190M is superior. The choice hinges on form factor: the W4190M is a mobile-only component, while the W2100 is a desktop card. Given the W4190M’s performance lead across every metric except Vulkan, it is the better choice for raw compute, provided the platform supports an MXM module.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD FirePro W4190M | AMD FirePro W2100 |

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

| Chip | Opal | Oland |

| Generation | FirePro Mobile (Wx100M) | FirePro GCN (Wx100) |

| Base Clock | 825 MHz | 630 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 900 MHz | 680 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) | 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 64.00 GB/s | 28.80 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 384 | 320 |

| TMUs | 24 | 20 |

| Pixel Rate | 7.200 GPixel/s | 5.440 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 21.60 GTexel/s | 13.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 691.2 GFLOPS | 435.2 GFLOPS |

| TDP | Not listed | 26 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Single-slot |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 200 W |

| Dimensions | Not listed | 168 mm (length), 69 mm (height) |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 2x DisplayPort 1.2 |

| Release Date | 2015-11-11 | 2014-08-11 |

| Predecessor | FirePro Mobility | FirePro Terascale |

| Successor | Radeon Pro Mobile | Radeon Pro Polaris |