AMD FirePro W4100 vs AMD Radeon R7 M340 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data places the AMD FirePro W4100 clearly ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 M340 in both recorded tests. In the Geekbench OpenCL workload, the FirePro W4100 scores 5478 against the R7 M340's 4932, a lead of 11.1 percent. The gap widens considerably in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the FirePro W4100 reaches 6496 while the R7 M340 manages 5193, a margin of 25.1 percent. Across the two tests, the FirePro W4100 wins both, giving it a 2-0 sweep in the head-to-head comparison.

The Vulkan result is particularly telling. A 25.1 percent advantage in that workload suggests the FirePro W4100 scales better with the lower-level API, likely benefiting from its larger shading unit count and wider memory interface. The OpenCL gap of 11.1 percent is more modest, but still a decisive margin. The R7 M340's closest rival in the database, the AMD Radeon R7 240, matches its average score exactly at 5063, which confirms that the R7 M340 sits in a lower performance tier altogether.

The FirePro W4100's average benchmark score of 5987 places it at the 34th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M at 5986 (a delta of 0 percent), the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 at 5982 (0.1 percent slower), and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server at 5996 (0.2 percent faster). The FirePro W4100 sits squarely in that cluster, effectively trading blows with those workstation and mobile parts. The R7 M340, by contrast, sits at the 30th percentile with an average score of 5063, and its nearest rivals are all AMD parts: the R7 240 at 5063, the FirePro W4170M at 5034 (0.6 percent behind), the R5 M430 at 5018 (0.9 percent behind), and the Radeon R7 Graphics at 4998 (1.3 percent behind).

What stands out is how much closer the R7 M340's rivals are to it than the FirePro W4100's rivals are to it. The FirePro W4100's nearest competitors are within a fraction of a percent, meaning its position is well-established. The R7 M340's nearest competitors are also close, but all of them trail it, and none of them approach the FirePro W4100's score. This indicates a clear tier separation between the two cards, not just a marginal difference.

Where Each One Wins

The FirePro W4100 wins in every recorded benchmark category. It is the faster card for OpenCL compute workloads, with its 5478 score beating the R7 M340's 4932 by 11.1 percent. For Vulkan workloads, the FirePro W4100's 6496 score is 25.1 percent higher than the R7 M340's 5193. If the workload in question relies on either of these APIs, the data points unambiguously to the FirePro W4100.

The R7 M340 has no benchmark wins to claim. Its only advantage lies in architectural consistency: it belongs to the GCN 3.0 generation, whereas the FirePro W4100 uses GCN 1.0. That said, architectural generation does not translate into performance here. The R7 M340's older rival, the R7 240, matches it exactly in average score, which suggests the R7 M340's newer architecture does not yield a practical benefit in the measured tests.

For users prioritizing compute throughput, the FirePro W4100 is the clear choice. Its FP32 output of 645.1 GFLOPS is close to the R7 M340's 653.4 GFLOPS, but the FirePro W4100's memory bandwidth of 64.00 GB/s is four times the R7 M340's 16.00 GB/s. That bandwidth advantage likely explains the consistent benchmark lead. The R7 M340 does offer FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, which could matter for specific workloads that use reduced precision, but the database records no benchmark for that capability.

The FirePro W4100 also benefits from a wider memory bus at 128 bit versus the R7 M340's 64 bit, and it has 512 shading units against the R7 M340's 320. These hardware differences align with the benchmark outcomes. The R7 M340's higher clock speeds, a boost of 1021 MHz versus the FirePro W4100's unspecified boost clock, do not compensate for the fewer shading units and the narrow memory interface.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro W4100 has an average benchmark score of 5987, while the AMD Radeon R7 M340 has an average score of 5063.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the Vulkan benchmark?

A: The FirePro W4100 scores 6496 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 25.1 percent higher than the R7 M340's 5193.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The FirePro W4100 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the R7 M340 supports DirectX 12 (12_0).

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

A: The FirePro W4100 has a memory bandwidth of 64.00 GB/s using a 128 bit bus with GDDR5 memory. The R7 M340 has 16.00 GB/s using a 64 bit bus with DDR3 memory.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The FirePro W4100 has 512 shading units, compared to 320 on the R7 M340.

Q: Are both GPUs still in production?

A: No. Both are listed as end-of-life in the database. The FirePro W4100 was released in August 2014, and the R7 M340 was released in May 2015.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. The FirePro W4100 uses the Cape Verde chip, while the R7 M340 uses the Meso chip. The FirePro W4100 belongs to the FirePro GCN (Wx100) generation, and the R7 M340 belongs to the Gem System (R7 M300) generation. Process nodes are the same at 28 nm from TSMC, but the transistor counts differ slightly: 1,500 million for the FirePro W4100 versus 1,550 million for the R7 M340. Die sizes are also close, with the FirePro W4100 at 123 mm² and the R7 M340 at 125 mm², giving transistor densities of 12.2M per mm² and 12.4M per mm² respectively.

Clock behavior differs. The FirePro W4100 has no recorded base or boost clock, while the R7 M340 has a base clock of 943 MHz and a boost clock of 1021 MHz. Memory clocks also differ: the FirePro W4100 runs at 1000 MHz with 4 Gbps effective, and the R7 M340 runs at 1000 MHz with 2 Gbps effective. The memory subsystem is a major divider. The FirePro W4100 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128 bit bus, delivering 64.00 GB/s. The R7 M340 has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64 bit bus, delivering 16.00 GB/s.

Compute resources differ as well. The FirePro W4100 has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. The R7 M340 has 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 render output units. Pixel rates reflect this: the FirePro W4100 reaches 10.08 GPixel/s, and the R7 M340 reaches 8.168 GPixel/s. Texture rates are closer, with the FirePro W4100 at 20.16 GTexel/s and the R7 M340 at 20.42 GTexel/s. FP32 output is nearly identical at 645.1 GFLOPS for the FirePro W4100 and 653.4 GFLOPS for the R7 M340. The R7 M340 also lists FP16 at 653.4 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the FirePro W4100 has no recorded FP16 value.

Power and physical specifications differ. The FirePro W4100 has a TDP of 50 W, is single-slot, requires no power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 250 W. The R7 M340 has no recorded TDP, slot width, power connector, or suggested PSU data. The FirePro W4100 uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the R7 M340 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. Display outputs are only recorded for the FirePro W4100, which has four mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs; the R7 M340 has no recorded display outputs. The FirePro W4100 has dimensions of 171 mm in length and 69 mm in height, while the R7 M340 has no recorded dimensions.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is significant. The FirePro W4100 is built on GCN 1.0, while the R7 M340 uses GCN 3.0. The FirePro W4100's predecessor is FirePro Terascale, and its successor is Radeon Pro Polaris. The R7 M340's predecessor is Solar System, and its successor is Polaris Mobile. The FirePro W4100 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The R7 M340 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The notable difference is the DirectX feature level, with the R7 M340 supporting the newer 12_0 feature set.

The GCN 1.0 architecture in the FirePro W4100 is older but pairs a larger complement of compute units with a much wider memory path. The GCN 3.0 architecture in the R7 M340 brings a newer feature set but with fewer shading units and a narrower memory bus. The R7 M340's 1:1 FP16 capability is a feature of the newer architecture, but it does not appear in any recorded benchmark. The FirePro W4100's lack of a recorded FP16 value suggests it either does not expose that capability or it is not prioritized in the database.

Both GPUs are manufactured by TSMC on the same 28 nm node. The R7 M340 has a slightly higher transistor count at 1,550 million versus 1,500 million, and a slightly larger die at 125 mm² versus 123 mm². These differences are minor and do not translate into a performance advantage. The R7 M340's higher transistor density of 12.4M per mm² versus 12.2M per mm² reflects the newer architecture's slightly more efficient packing, but the benchmark results show that efficiency gains do not overcome the hardware resource deficit.

The FirePro W4100's four mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs and PCIe 3.0 x16 interface mark it as a workstation-oriented part, designed for multi-display and compute-focused environments. The R7 M340 has no recorded display outputs or interface width beyond PCIe 3.0 x8, which is a more limited configuration. The FirePro W4100's 50 W TDP and 250 W suggested PSU underline its workstation positioning, whereas the R7 M340 has no power data recorded, typical of mobile-oriented parts that are often paired with a specific laptop platform rather than a standalone PSU.