AMD FirePro W4100 vs Intel UHD Graphics P750 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records only one shared benchmark between the Intel UHD Graphics P750 and the AMD FirePro W4100: Geekbench OpenCL. The Intel solution posts a score of 6554, while the AMD FirePro W4100 reaches 5478. That is a 19.6% advantage for the Intel part, a substantial margin in a compute workload that stresses raw shading throughput.

The Intel UHD Graphics P750 sits at the 38th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the AMD FirePro W4100 sits at the 34th percentile. The gap between those percentiles is small, but the OpenCL delta is not. A 19.6% lead in a single compute test suggests the Intel part has a meaningful edge in general-purpose compute tasks, even though both cards occupy the lower-middle tier of the performance distribution.

The nearest rivals for the Intel part reinforce its position. The AMD Radeon HD 7730M scores 6581, which is 0.4% above the P750, and the AMD Radeon R7 M460 scores 6612, 0.9% above. On the other side, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M scores 6513, 0.6% below, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M scores 6493, 0.9% below. The P750 is essentially bracketed by a tight cluster of mobile GPUs, all within roughly 1% of each other. Its 19.6% lead over the FirePro W4100 is therefore not an outlier caused by a weak comparison class, it is a genuine cross-vendor gap.

The AMD FirePro W4100's nearest rivals tell a different story. The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M scores 5986, essentially identical at a 0% delta. The NVIDIA Quadro K4000 scores 5982, 0.1% below. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server scores 5996, 0.2% above, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M scores 6000, 0.2% above. The W4100 is firmly planted in a cluster around 5900 to 6000 points, which makes its 5478 OpenCL result look like the low end of its own peer group. Its average benchmark score across both recorded tests, 5987, is much closer to those rivals than its OpenCL-only result suggests.

That distinction matters. The W4100 also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 6496, which is higher than its OpenCL score of 5478. The Intel UHD Graphics P750 has no Vulkan result in the database, so a direct comparison on that API is impossible. Still, the data shows that the W4100 is not uniformly slower than its rivals, it is specifically weaker in OpenCL, where the P750 beats it decisively.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from opposite ends of the design spectrum. The Intel UHD Graphics P750 is built on Intel's Generation 12.1 architecture, using the Rocket Lake chip, and it is fabricated on Intel's 14 nm+++ process node. The AMD FirePro W4100 uses the Cape Verde chip with GCN 1.0 architecture, built on TSMC's 28 nm node. The process gap is significant in theory, Intel's 14 nm+++ is a more refined node, but the W4100 is a discrete card with its own memory and power delivery, while the P750 is an integrated GPU.

The transistor counts reflect that difference. The AMD FirePro W4100 packs 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.2M per mm². The Intel part has no transistor or die size figures in the database, so a density comparison is not possible. What is clear is that the W4100 is a dedicated chip with its own thermal envelope, while the P750 shares the CPU package and system memory.

The P750's memory configuration is entirely system-shared. Its memory size, type, and bus width are all listed as "System Shared," and bandwidth is "System Dependent." The W4100, in contrast, has 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, with 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth and a 1000 MHz memory clock running at 4 Gbps effective. That is a fundamental architectural divergence: the integrated part relies on whatever the host system provides, while the discrete card has a fixed, dedicated memory pipeline.

The shading resources also differ. The Intel P750 has 256 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. The AMD W4100 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The Intel part has more texture and pixel throughput hardware, while the AMD part has double the shading units. That asymmetry explains some of the benchmark behavior: pixel rate for the P750 is 41.60 GPixel/s versus 10.08 GPixel/s for the W4100, and texture rate is 83.20 GTexel/s versus 20.16 GTexel/s. The Intel part leads in fill-rate terms by a wide margin.

The FP32 compute figures are much closer. The P750 delivers 665.6 GFLOPS, while the W4100 delivers 645.1 GFLOPS. The Intel part also lists FP16 at 1,331.2 GFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the AMD part has no FP16 figure recorded. The fact that fill rates differ by roughly 4x while FP32 is nearly identical suggests the two architectures allocate their resources very differently.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel UHD Graphics P750 wins the only direct benchmark comparison, Geekbench OpenCL, with a 19.6% margin. That result, combined with its higher pixel and texture rates, points to strengths in compute workloads that scale with texture and pixel throughput. The P750 also has a higher average benchmark score, 6554, compared to the W4100's 5987. In the database's ranking, the P750 sits at the 38th percentile versus the W4100's 34th percentile.

The AMD FirePro W4100 wins in areas that the P750 cannot match because it does not have the hardware. It has 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory with 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth, which is a fixed resource not dependent on system RAM. The P750's memory bandwidth is "System Dependent," meaning its performance in memory-heavy tasks will vary with the host platform. The W4100 also has a Vulkan score of 6496, which exceeds its own OpenCL score by 18.6%, and no Vulkan result exists for the P750 in the database.

The W4100 is a single-slot discrete card with four mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, while the P750's display outputs are "Motherboard Dependent." For multi-monitor professional setups, the W4100 offers a known, fixed output configuration. The P750, being an IGP, depends entirely on the motherboard's implementation.

The power figures also split the two. The P750 has a 15 W TDP, while the W4100 has a 50 W TDP. The W4100 requires no power connectors but suggests a 250 W power supply. The P750 is an IGP, so it draws from the CPU package. For low-power or embedded systems, the P750 is clearly the more efficient choice. For a workstation that already has a PCIe slot and power budget, the W4100's higher consumption buys dedicated memory and a fixed display configuration.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The Intel UHD Graphics P750 uses a 14 nm+++ process from Intel, while the AMD FirePro W4100 uses a 28 nm process from TSMC. The P750 has no transistor or die size data; the W4100 has 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die.

Clock behavior differs. The P750 has a base clock of 350 MHz and a boost clock of 1300 MHz. The W4100 has no base or boost clock recorded, only a memory clock of 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective). The P750's memory is system-shared with dependent bandwidth; the W4100 has 2 GB GDDR5, a 128-bit bus, and 64.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Shader resources: the P750 has 256 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The W4100 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Pixel rate is 41.60 GPixel/s for the P750 versus 10.08 GPixel/s for the W4100. Texture rate is 83.20 GTexel/s versus 20.16 GTexel/s. FP32 is 665.6 GFLOPS versus 645.1 GFLOPS. The P750 lists FP16 at 1,331.2 GFLOPS; the W4100 has no FP16 figure.

The P750 has a 15 W TDP and is an IGP with a Ring Bus interface. The W4100 has a 50 W TDP, is a single-slot card, has no power connectors, suggests a 250 W power supply, and uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs are motherboard dependent for the P750 and four mini-DisplayPort 1.2 for the W4100.

API support differs. The P750 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The W4100 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The P750 has the higher API version numbers in two of the three categories.

The W4100 has a release date of 2014-08-12, a predecessor in FirePro Terascale, and a successor in Radeon Pro Polaris. The P750 has no release date, predecessor, or successor listed. Both are end-of-life products.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics P750 scores 6554 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD FirePro W4100 scores 5478. The Intel part leads by 19.6%.

Q: Does the AMD FirePro W4100 have any benchmark where it wins?

A: The database records no head-to-head win for the W4100 against the P750. It does have a Geekbench Vulkan score of 6496, but the P750 has no Vulkan result recorded, so no comparison is possible.

Q: How do the memory configurations differ?

A: The P750 uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The W4100 has 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth and a 1000 MHz memory clock.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Intel UHD Graphics P750 has a 15 W TDP. The AMD FirePro W4100 has a 50 W TDP and suggests a 250 W power supply.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD FirePro W4100 has 512 shading units, double the 256 shading units of the Intel UHD Graphics P750. However, the P750 has higher pixel and texture rates.

Q: Are both GPUs the same age?

A: No. The AMD FirePro W4100 has a release date of 2014-08-12. The Intel UHD Graphics P750 has no release date in the database. Both are marked as end-of-life.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to a clear compute winner: the Intel UHD Graphics P750 leads the AMD FirePro W4100 by 19.6% in Geekbench OpenCL, and it holds a 38th percentile ranking versus the W4100's 34th. The P750 also dominates in pixel rate, 41.60 GPixel/s versus 10.08 GPixel/s, and texture rate, 83.20 GTexel/s versus 20.16 GTexel/s, while consuming only 15 W against the W4100's 50 W. For any workload that leans on OpenCL compute or fill-rate-limited rendering, the P750 is the stronger choice according to the recorded data.

The AMD FirePro W4100, however, has structural advantages that no benchmark can override. It has 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory with 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth, a fixed resource that does not depend on the host system. It offers four mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, while the P750's display outputs depend on the motherboard. It also has a Vulkan score of 6496, which suggests its graphics API performance may be better than its OpenCL result implies, though no direct P750 Vulkan comparison exists.

The choice depends on the use case. For a low-power integrated system where compute throughput per watt matters and the motherboard can supply display outputs, the Intel UHD Graphics P750 is supported by the data. For a workstation that needs dedicated memory, a fixed multi-monitor output configuration, and a known PCIe form factor, the AMD FirePro W4100 offers capabilities the P750 structurally cannot provide. The P750 wins the raw compute comparison, but the W4100 wins on platform independence and professional connectivity.