AMD FirePro W4100 vs AMD Radeon R7 M350 Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon R7 M350 and AMD FirePro W4100 are both end-of-life mobile-oriented GPUs from different AMD families, and the benchmark data shows a split decision. The R7 M350 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test decisively, scoring 6991 against the FirePro W4100’s 5478, a 27.6% advantage. However, the FirePro W4100 strikes back in Geekbench Vulkan, scoring 6496 versus 5662, a 12.8% lead for the FirePro.

For users prioritizing OpenCL compute workloads, the R7 M350 is the clear choice. Its 384 shading units and GCN 3.0 architecture deliver higher raw FP32 throughput at 779.5 GFLOPS, and the benchmark confirms this advantage. The FirePro W4100, despite having 512 shading units, only manages 645.1 GFLOPS, which explains its lower OpenCL score. The R7 M350 also sits at the 36th percentile of all GPUs, slightly above the FirePro’s 34th percentile, and its average benchmark score of 6327 edges out the FirePro’s 5987.

But the FirePro W4100 is the better pick for Vulkan-based workloads. Its 12.8% lead in that test shows that raw shading unit count isn’t everything—the FirePro’s 128-bit memory bus and 64.00 GB/s bandwidth give it a structural advantage in certain compute patterns. The FirePro also has a 50 W TDP with no power connectors and a single-slot design, making it a more practical choice for compact systems where the R7 M350’s power requirements are unspecified. If you need a card that slots into a tight chassis with minimal power draw, the FirePro W4100 is the safer bet.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different generations of AMD’s GCN architecture. The Radeon R7 M350 uses GCN 3.0 on the Meso chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.4 million per mm². The FirePro W4100 uses the older GCN 1.0 architecture on the Cape Verde chip, also 28 nm TSMC, with 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die—a density of 12.2 million per mm². The die sizes and transistor counts are remarkably close, but the architectural generations differ by two full iterations.

The R7 M350 belongs to the “Gem System (R7 M300)” generation, while the FirePro W4100 is part of the “FirePro GCN (Wx100)” family. Their predecessors and successors also diverge: the R7 M350 follows the Solar System and leads into Polaris Mobile, whereas the FirePro W4100 comes after FirePro Terascale and feeds into Radeon Pro Polaris.

Memory configurations differ sharply. The R7 M350 uses 4 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 16.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro W4100 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 64.00 GB/s—four times the bandwidth. Clock speeds also differ: the R7 M350 runs at 1000 MHz base and 1015 MHz boost, while the FirePro W4100 has no listed base or boost clocks, only a memory clock of 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective). The R7 M350’s memory runs at 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective), half the effective rate of the FirePro’s memory.

Shading resources favor the FirePro on paper: 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs versus the R7 M350’s 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Yet the R7 M350 achieves higher pixel and texture rates in some metrics—8.120 GPixel/s and 24.36 GTexel/s versus 10.08 GPixel/s and 20.16 GTexel/s. The FirePro wins pixel rate due to its 16 ROPs, but the R7 M350 has a higher texture rate despite fewer TMUs, thanks to its higher clock speed.

API support is nearly identical: both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170. The DirectX support differs, with the R7 M350 at 12 (12_0) and the FirePro at 12 (11_1). The R7 M350 also lists FP16 at 779.5 GFLOPS (1:1), while the FirePro has no FP16 listing.

Where Each One Wins

The R7 M350 wins in OpenCL-heavy tasks. Its 27.6% OpenCL lead is substantial and directly reflects its higher FP32 throughput of 779.5 GFLOPS. For compute workloads like physics simulations, image processing, or any OpenCL-accelerated application, the data says the R7 M350 will finish noticeably faster. Its 4 GB memory capacity also gives it more headroom for larger datasets than the FirePro’s 2 GB.

The FirePro W4100 wins in Vulkan-based rendering and compute. Its 12.8% Vulkan lead suggests that the newer API favors the FirePro’s memory architecture—the 128-bit bus and 64.00 GB/s bandwidth are likely the deciding factors. Vulkan workloads often stress memory bandwidth more than raw shader count, and the FirePro’s fourfold bandwidth advantage shows. The FirePro also wins on practical deployment: it has a 50 W TDP, a single-slot form factor, no power connectors, a suggested PSU of 250 W, and four mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. The R7 M350 lists none of these specs, so the FirePro is the only one with documented physical specifications.

The R7 M350 counters with a better average benchmark score of 6327 versus 5987, and a higher percentile ranking at 36 versus 34. Both have one win each in the head-to-head tests, so the overall picture is one of specialization rather than dominance.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M350. It scores 6991 in Geekbench OpenCL versus the FirePro W4100’s 5478, a 27.6% advantage.

Q: Which GPU is faster in Vulkan?

A: The AMD FirePro W4100. It scores 6496 in Geekbench Vulkan versus the R7 M350’s 5662, a 12.8% lead.

Q: Does the FirePro W4100 have more shading units?

A: Yes. The FirePro W4100 has 512 shading units, while the R7 M350 has 384. Despite this, the R7 M350 has higher FP32 throughput at 779.5 GFLOPS.

Q: What memory type and capacity does each GPU use?

A: The R7 M350 uses 4 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 16.00 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro W4100 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has better display output options?

A: The FirePro W4100 is the only one with documented display outputs: 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2. The R7 M350 has no display outputs listed.

Q: What are the power requirements for each?

A: The FirePro W4100 has a 50 W TDP, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The R7 M350 has no power specifications listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test delivers the largest margin of victory in either direction. The R7 M350 scores 6991 against the FirePro W4100’s 5478, a 27.6% difference. This is a commanding lead that will be visible in any OpenCL-based application. The R7 M350’s higher clock speeds—1000 MHz base and 1015 MHz boost—combined with its GCN 3.0 architecture, clearly overcome the FirePro’s higher shading unit count. The FirePro’s 645.1 GFLOPS FP32 figure is simply 17.2% lower than the R7 M350’s 779.5 GFLOPS, and the benchmark reflects that gap.

The Geekbench Vulkan test flips the script. The FirePro W4100 scores 6496, beating the R7 M350’s 5662 by 12.8%. This is where memory bandwidth becomes the deciding factor. The FirePro’s 64.00 GB/s bandwidth is four times the R7 M350’s 16.00 GB/s, and Vulkan’s low-level access patterns appear to exploit this advantage. The FirePro also has 16 ROPs and a 128-bit bus, both of which contribute to better memory throughput in rendering tasks. The R7 M350’s 8 ROPs and 64-bit bus are bottlenecks here.

The average benchmark scores tell a slightly different story. The R7 M350 averages 6327 across both tests, while the FirePro averages 5987—a 5.7% edge for the R7 M350. This is because the R7 M350’s OpenCL win is larger in percentage terms than the FirePro’s Vulkan win. The R7 M350’s nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 4100, scores 6330, just 0.1% higher. The FirePro W4100’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M, scores 5986, essentially tied. Both GPUs sit in a crowded mid-range pack, with the R7 M350 slightly ahead of its competition and the FirePro holding its own.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every key specification except for process node, foundry, and some API support. Both use 28 nm TSMC, but the R7 M350 uses GCN 3.0 while the FirePro W4100 uses GCN 1.0. The R7 M350 has 1,550 million transistors on 125 mm²; the FirePro has 1,500 million on 123 mm². The R7 M350’s base clock is 1000 MHz and boost is 1015 MHz; the FirePro lists no base or boost clocks. Memory clocks are identical at 1000 MHz, but effective rates differ: 2 Gbps for the R7 M350, 4 Gbps for the FirePro.

Memory capacity and type diverge completely: 4 GB DDR3 for the R7 M350 versus 2 GB GDDR5 for the FirePro. Bus width is 64-bit versus 128-bit, and bandwidth is 16.00 GB/s versus 64.00 GB/s. Shading units are 384 versus 512, TMUs are 24 versus 32, and ROPs are 8 versus 16. Pixel rate favors the FirePro at 10.08 GPixel/s versus 8.120 GPixel/s, while texture rate favors the R7 M350 at 24.36 GTexel/s versus 20.16 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput favors the R7 M350 at 779.5 GFLOPS versus 645.1 GFLOPS; FP16 is only listed for the R7 M350 at 779.5 GFLOPS.

The FirePro W4100 has a 50 W TDP, single-slot form factor, no power connectors, a 250 W suggested PSU, a 171 mm length, 69 mm height, and 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. The R7 M350 has none of these specifications listed. Bus interface differs: PCIe 3.0 x8 for the R7 M350, PCIe 3.0 x16 for the FirePro. DirectX support is 12 (12_0) for the R7 M350 and 12 (11_1) for the FirePro; both share OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170. Release dates differ by roughly nine months—the R7 M350 came out on 2015-05-04, the FirePro on 2014-08-12.