GPU Comparison

The AMD FirePro W4100 and AMD Radeon HD 8790M are both end-of-life mobile and workstation-oriented graphics solutions built on the same GCN 1.0 architecture, but they serve very different physical and performance niches. The data reveals a clear, if modest, performance hierarchy, with the FirePro W4100 taking a 2-0 win record in the head-to-head benchmarks, yet the Radeon chip counters with a higher raw compute ceiling. This analysis breaks down where each part stands based strictly on the benchmark and specification data provided.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct comparison between the two AMD parts is close, but the FirePro W4100 emerges as the consistent victor across both measured workloads. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the FirePro W4100 scores 5478 against the Radeon HD 8790M’s 5017, a delta of 9.2% in favor of the workstation card. This is the larger margin of the two tests, indicating that the FirePro’s compute configuration holds a meaningful advantage in general-purpose GPU workloads.

The Vulkan test narrows the gap considerably. The FirePro W4100 posts 6496, while the Radeon HD 8790M reaches 6365, resulting in a slim 2.1% lead for the FirePro. While still a win, this margin is nearly within the noise of benchmark variance, suggesting that the two chips are far more evenly matched when it comes to modern graphics API performance. The data implies that the architectural similarities between the two GCN 1.0 parts dominate in Vulkan, whereas the FirePro’s additional execution resources tip the scales more decisively in OpenCL.

Looking at the broader context, the FirePro W4100’s average benchmark score of 5987 places it in the 34th percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon HD 8790M’s 5691 average sits at the 33rd percentile. These are effectively adjacent performance tiers. The FirePro’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M, scores 5986, a delta of 0%, meaning the AMD workstation part is statistically tied with that professional mobile GPU. The Radeon HD 8790M, meanwhile, trails the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 by 0.4% and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670MX by 0.5%, placing it in the same performance band as those integrated and discrete parts.

Where Each One Wins

The FirePro W4100 wins outright in both head-to-head benchmarks, but the nature of those wins points to different strengths. Its 9.2% lead in OpenCL is the standout result. This is a compute-heavy workload, and the FirePro’s configuration of 512 shading units versus the Radeon’s 384 gives it a structural advantage that translates directly into that double-digit percentage lead in raw parallel processing.

The Radeon HD 8790M, despite losing both tests, is not without its own merits in the data. Its FP32 compute rating is actually higher at 691.2 GFLOPS compared to the FirePro’s 645.1 GFLOPS. This is a fascinating inversion: the Radeon chip has higher theoretical floating-point throughput but scores lower in the actual OpenCL and Vulkan tests. This suggests that the FirePro’s higher pixel rate (10.08 GPixel/s vs 7.200 GPixel/s) and its superior memory bandwidth utilization, despite both having 64.00 GB/s, allow it to execute workloads more efficiently in practice. The Radeon’s higher texture rate of 21.60 GTexel/s versus the FirePro’s 20.16 GTexel/s also fails to translate into a benchmark victory, indicating that the FirePro’s larger ROP count (16 vs 8) is more impactful in these specific tests.

For use-case scenarios, the FirePro W4100 is the better choice for any task that relies on OpenCL compute acceleration, given its 9.2% lead. The Vulkan results are too close to call a definitive winner for gaming or modern API workloads, with the 2.1% margin being negligible. The Radeon HD 8790M’s higher FP32 rating does not manifest in the provided benchmarks, so its theoretical advantage remains just that, theoretical.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on the same foundational GCN 1.0 architecture and manufactured on TSMC’s 28 nm process, but they diverge significantly in their physical implementations. The FirePro W4100 uses the Cape Verde chip, a larger die measuring 123 mm² with 1,500 million transistors. The Radeon HD 8790M employs the Mars chip, which is substantially smaller at 77 mm² and houses 950 million transistors. The transistor density is nearly identical, 12.2M / mm² for the FirePro and 12.3M / mm² for the Radeon, indicating that the process technology is the same, but the FirePro simply has more silicon to work with.

This silicon advantage translates directly into execution resources. The FirePro W4100 features 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 ROPs. The Radeon HD 8790M is cut down to 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and only 8 ROPs. The ROP difference is particularly stark; the FirePro has double the pixel output capability, which explains its 10.08 GPixel/s pixel rate versus the Radeon’s 7.200 GPixel/s. Interestingly, the Radeon’s texture rate is higher at 21.60 GTexel/s compared to the FirePro’s 20.16 GTexel/s, a result of its higher clock speeds compensating for fewer TMUs.

Memory configurations are identical on paper: both have 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding the same 64.00 GB/s bandwidth and 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) memory clock. The core clocks, however, are where the Radeon compensates for its smaller size. The HD 8790M has a base clock of 850 MHz and a boost clock of 900 MHz, while the FirePro W4100’s base and boost clocks are not listed in the data. This clock advantage is why the Radeon achieves a higher FP32 rating (691.2 GFLOPS) and texture rate, despite having fewer cores.

The form factors are entirely different. The FirePro W4100 is a single-slot PCIe 3.0 x16 card with a 171 mm length and 69 mm height, drawing a 50 W TDP and requiring a 250 W PSU. It outputs to four mini-DisplayPort 1.2 connectors. The Radeon HD 8790M is an MXM-A (3.0) module with no fixed dimensions, no listed TDP, and its display outputs are described as "Portable Device Dependent," meaning it is designed to be embedded into laptops rather than installed as a standalone card.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the AMD FirePro W4100 is the superior performer. It wins both head-to-head tests, with a decisive 9.2% margin in OpenCL and a marginal 2.1% edge in Vulkan. Its average benchmark score of 5987 is 5.2% higher than the Radeon HD 8790M’s 5691. For any user prioritizing compute performance, particularly in OpenCL-based applications, the FirePro W4100 is the clear choice.

The Radeon HD 8790M, however, should not be dismissed. Its higher FP32 rating of 691.2 GFLOPS and boost clock of 900 MHz suggest that in workloads not captured by these two benchmarks, it might hold its own. The data shows it is competitive in Vulkan, trailing by only 2.1%, and its smaller die size and lower transistor count could imply better power efficiency per transistor, though no TDP is provided to confirm this. For a mobile application where the MXM form factor is required, the Radeon is the only option, as the FirePro is a PCIe add-in card.

The choice ultimately hinges on the platform. If a desktop workstation with PCIe slots is available, the FirePro W4100 offers better measured performance and a 2-0 win record. If an MXM-based laptop is the target, the Radeon HD 8790M is the only viable part, and its performance is not far behind, with the Vulkan gap being nearly imperceptible.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro W4100 has an average benchmark score of 5987, which is higher than the AMD Radeon HD 8790M’s average of 5691.

Q: How much faster is the FirePro W4100 in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The FirePro W4100 scores 5478 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 9.2% higher than the Radeon HD 8790M’s score of 5017.

Q: Does the Radeon HD 8790M have any performance advantage over the FirePro W4100?

A: Yes, the Radeon HD 8790M has a higher FP32 compute rating of 691.2 GFLOPS compared to the FirePro W4100’s 645.1 GFLOPS, and a higher texture rate of 21.60 GTexel/s versus 20.16 GTexel/s.

Q: What is the physical form factor difference between the two cards?

A: The FirePro W4100 is a single-slot PCIe 3.0 x16 card measuring 171 mm in length, while the Radeon HD 8790M is an MXM-A (3.0) module with no listed dimensions.

Q: Do both GPUs use the same amount of memory and bandwidth?

A: Yes, both have 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth at a 1000 MHz memory clock.

Q: What is the percentile ranking of each GPU against all other GPUs?

A: The FirePro W4100 is in the 34th percentile, while the Radeon HD 8790M is in the 33rd percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FirePro W4100 | AMD Radeon HD 8790M |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Chip | Cape Verde | Mars |

| Generation | FirePro GCN (Wx100) | Solar System (HD 8700M) |

| Transistors | 1,500 million | 950 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 77 mm² |

| Base Clock | Not listed | 850 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not listed | 900 MHz |

| Shading Units | 512 | 384 |

| TMUs | 32 | 24 |

| ROPs | 16 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 10.08 GPixel/s | 7.200 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 20.16 GTexel/s | 21.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 645.1 GFLOPS | 691.2 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 50 W | Not listed |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | MXM Module |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | Not listed |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-A (3.0) |

| Display Outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 | Portable Device Dependent |

| Dimensions | 171 mm (length) | Not listed |

| Release Date | 2014-08-12 | 2013-03-31 |

| Predecessor | FirePro Terascale | London |

| Successor | Radeon Pro Polaris | Gem System |