AMD FirePro W4100 vs AMD Radeon R7 M260X Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro W4100 has a higher average benchmark score of 5987, while the AMD Radeon R7 M260X averages 5161. The FirePro W4100 sits at the 34th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the 30th percentile for the R7 M260X.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in OpenCL performance?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M260X wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 5690, beating the FirePro W4100's 5478. That is a 3.7% advantage for the R7 M260X in this workload.

Q: Which GPU wins in Vulkan performance?

A: The AMD FirePro W4100 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test decisively, scoring 6496 against the R7 M260X's 4631. This represents a 40.3% lead for the FirePro W4100.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: The FirePro W4100 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. The R7 M260X has 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory, also on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. Both run memory at 1000 MHz with 4 Gbps effective speed.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The API feature sets are identical between the two.

Q: What is the transistor count difference between the two chips?

A: The FirePro W4100's Cape Verde chip contains 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, while the R7 M260X's Opal chip contains 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die. Transistor density is nearly identical at 12.2M / mm² for the FirePro and 12.3M / mm² for the R7 M260X.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on AMD's GCN 1.0 architecture and manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but they use different chips with meaningfully different configurations. The FirePro W4100 uses the Cape Verde chip, which is the larger of the two with 1,500 million transistors spread across a 123 mm² die. The Radeon R7 M260X uses the Opal chip, a smaller design with 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die. The transistor density is almost identical, 12.2M / mm² versus 12.3M / mm², so the difference is purely a matter of scale.

The compute resources differ substantially. The FirePro W4100 has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation pipelines. The R7 M260X has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and only 8 ROPs. This means the FirePro carries 33% more shading units, 33% more TMUs, and double the ROP count of the R7 M260X. The clock behavior also differs: the FirePro has no base or boost clock listed, while the R7 M260X has a base clock of 620 MHz and a boost clock of 715 MHz.

Memory configurations are similar in bus width and bandwidth, both using 128-bit GDDR5 at 64.00 GB/s, but the capacity differs. The FirePro W4100 has 2 GB, while the R7 M260X has 1024 MB. The FirePro is a desktop workstation card with a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, a single-slot design, 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, dimensions of 171 mm by 6.7 inches in length and 69 mm by 2.7 inches in height, and a 50 W TDP with no power connectors required. The R7 M260X is a portable device GPU with a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface and display outputs listed as "Portable Device Dependent." Its power consumption is not specified in the database.

The generation labels also differ: the FirePro belongs to the FirePro GCN (Wx100) generation, while the R7 M260X is part of the Gem System (R7 M200) generation. Both are end-of-life products. The FirePro W4100 was released in 2014, while the R7 M260X was released in 2015. The FirePro's predecessor is FirePro Terascale and its successor is Radeon Pro Polaris; the R7 M260X's predecessor is Solar System and its successor is Polaris Mobile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two GPUs split their head-to-head benchmark results, with each winning one test. The Radeon R7 M260X takes the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 5690, edging out the FirePro W4100's 5478. The margin is a modest 3.7%, which puts the R7 M260X slightly ahead in this compute workload. For context, the R7 M260X's nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M at 5154 (0.1% behind), the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M at 5211 (1% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M at 5236 (1.4% behind). Its average benchmark score of 5161 places it just above the AMD Radeon R7 240, which scores 5063 and trails by 1.9%.

The FirePro W4100 answers back in the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 6496, versus 4631 for the R7 M260X. That is a 40.3% advantage, a far larger margin than the R7 M260X's OpenCL win. The FirePro's average benchmark score of 5987 puts it in line with the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M at 5986 (0% delta), the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 at 5982 (0.1% ahead of that rival), and just behind the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server at 5996 (0.2% behind) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M at 6000 (0.2% behind).

The Vulkan result is the standout number in this comparison. A 40.3% difference in Vulkan is far more significant than the 3.7% difference in OpenCL, meaning the FirePro's overall average score of 5987 versus 5161 reflects a substantial aggregate advantage. The R7 M260X's OpenCL win demonstrates that the smaller chip can hold its own in certain compute tasks, but the Vulkan gap shows the FirePro W4100 is the stronger performer in modern graphics API workloads. The wins are split one to one, but the magnitude of the FirePro's Vulkan victory dominates the aggregate picture.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD FirePro W4100 as the stronger overall GPU. Its average benchmark score of 5987 is 16% higher than the R7 M260X's 5161, and it sits at the 34th percentile of all GPUs versus the 30th percentile for the R7 M260X. The Vulkan benchmark is the decisive evidence: the FirePro leads by 40.3%, a margin that dwarfs the R7 M260X's 3.7% OpenCL advantage. In aggregate, the FirePro's performance profile is closer to workstation-grade NVIDIA Quadro parts like the K4000M and K4000, while the R7 M260X sits alongside mobile and entry-level desktop parts.

For users prioritizing modern graphics APIs, the FirePro W4100 is the clear choice. Its Vulkan score of 6496 indicates strong driver optimization and architectural throughput for current-generation workloads. The R7 M260X's OpenCL win, while real, is narrow and does not offset the FirePro's commanding Vulkan lead. The FirePro also offers double the memory capacity at 2 GB versus 1024 MB, which matters for larger datasets and higher-resolution textures.

The R7 M260X has its place as a portable-device GPU with a lower-power footprint implied by its mobile positioning, but the database does not list a TDP for it. Its 384 shading units and 8 ROPs are clear hardware limitations relative to the FirePro's 512 shading units and 16 ROPs. The R7 M260X wins only one benchmark and does so by a small margin. The verdict is straightforward: the FirePro W4100 is the better performer, and the R7 M260X is a weaker alternative that happens to excel in one specific OpenCL workload.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FirePro W4100 | AMD Radeon R7 M260X |

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

| Chip | Cape Verde | Opal |

| Generation | FirePro GCN (Wx100) | Gem System (R7 M200) |

| Transistors | 1,500 million | 950 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 77 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.2M / mm² | 12.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | Not listed | 620 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not listed | 715 MHz |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 1024 MB |

| Shading Units | 512 | 384 |

| TMUs | 32 | 24 |

| ROPs | 16 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 10.08 GPixel/s | 5.720 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 20.16 GTexel/s | 17.16 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 645.1 GFLOPS | 549.1 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 50 W | Not listed |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Not listed |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

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

| Dimensions | 171 mm (6.7 inches) x 69 mm (2.7 inches) | Not listed |

| Release Date | 2014 | 2015 |

| Predecessor | FirePro Terascale | Solar System |

| Successor | Radeon Pro Polaris | Polaris Mobile |

The two GPUs share the same GCN 1.0 architecture, 28 nm process, TSMC foundry, memory type (GDDR5), memory bus width (128 bit), memory bandwidth (64.00 GB/s), memory clock (1000 MHz, 4 Gbps effective), API support (DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.2.170), power connector requirement (None), and production status (End-of-life).

Where Each One Wins

AMD FirePro W4100: The FirePro wins in Vulkan performance by a wide margin, scoring 6496 versus 4631, a 40.3% advantage. Its hardware configuration supports this: 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs give it higher pixel rate (10.08 GPixel/s versus 5.720 GPixel/s) and texture rate (20.16 GTexel/s versus 17.16 GTexel/s). Its FP32 throughput of 645.1 GFLOPS exceeds the R7 M260X's 549.1 GFLOPS. The 2 GB memory capacity is double the R7 M260X's 1024 MB, and the PCIe 3.0 x16 interface offers more bandwidth to the host system than the R7 M260X's PCIe 3.0 x8. The FirePro is the workstation-oriented card with 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, making it suitable for multi-display professional setups. Its average benchmark score of 5987 places it alongside the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M and K4000, which both score near 5986 and 5982 respectively.

AMD Radeon R7 M260X: The R7 M260X wins the OpenCL benchmark with a score of 5690, a 3.7% edge over the FirePro's 5478. This is its only benchmark victory, and the margin is small. In the database, its average score of 5161 puts it close to the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M at 5154 and the AMD Radeon R7 240 at 5063. The R7 M260X has a listed base clock of 620 MHz and boost clock of 715 MHz, which the FirePro lacks in its specifications, and its transistor density is marginally higher at 12.3M / mm² versus 12.2M / mm². As a portable device GPU with no listed TDP or dimensions, it is designed for mobile integration rather than standalone workstation use. The R7 M260X's advantage is limited to this single OpenCL workload; everywhere else, the FirePro's larger chip, higher compute throughput, and double memory capacity make it the more capable product.