AMD FirePro W4100 vs NVIDIA GeForce 930A Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data in this comparison favors the AMD FirePro W4100. In the only recorded head-to-head test, Geekbench OpenCL, the FirePro W4100 scored 5478 against the GeForce 930A’s 5317, a 3% advantage. The FirePro W4100 also holds a higher average benchmark score of 5987 versus 5317, and it sits in the 34th percentile of all GPUs, while the GeForce 930A sits in the 31st.

The AMD FirePro W4100 is the pick for compute tasks and professional workloads. Its higher memory bandwidth, larger bus width, and greater shading unit count give it a measurable edge in OpenCL performance. The NVIDIA GeForce 930A is the pick for low-power, portable deployments. Its 33 W TDP is lower than the FirePro’s 50 W, it uses a narrower PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, and its IGP slot width means it is designed for integration into laptops or compact systems. If the workload is raw compute throughput in a desktop workstation, the FirePro W4100 wins. If power draw and physical footprint are the constraints, the GeForce 930A is the more fitting choice.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations. The AMD FirePro W4100 uses the Cape Verde chip built on GCN 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA GeForce 930A uses the GM108 chip built on Maxwell architecture, also on a 28 nm process at TSMC. Both are end-of-life products, with the FirePro released on August 12, 2014, and the GeForce on March 12, 2015.

The FirePro W4100 has a larger physical die at 123 mm² and packs 1,500 million transistors, giving it a transistor density of 12.2 million per square millimeter. The GeForce 930A has a smaller die at 77 mm² and contains 1,020 million transistors, for a density of 13.2 million per square millimeter. The Maxwell chip is denser, but the GCN chip is bigger overall.

Compute resources differ significantly. The FirePro W4100 features 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. The GeForce 930A has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The FirePro’s higher ROP count directly supports its higher pixel rate of 10.08 GPixel/s versus 7.528 GPixel/s. The GeForce 930A, however, has a higher texture rate at 22.58 GTexel/s versus 20.16 GTexel/s, due to its higher boost clock.

Clock speeds tell part of the story. The FirePro W4100 has no recorded base or boost clock, but its memory runs at 1000 MHz with 4 Gbps effective. The GeForce 930A has a base clock of 928 MHz and a boost clock of 941 MHz, with memory at 1001 MHz and 2 Gbps effective. The GeForce’s higher core clocks help it reach 722.7 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the FirePro manages 645.1 GFLOPS. The FirePro’s advantage in compute comes from its wider memory subsystem, not raw clock speed.

Memory configuration is a major divider. The FirePro W4100 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The GeForce 930A uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, yielding only 16.02 GB/s. That fourfold difference in bandwidth is the single largest architectural gap between the two cards.

API support is similar but not identical. Both support DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6. The FirePro W4100 supports Vulkan 1.2.170, while the GeForce 930A supports Vulkan 1.4. The FirePro offers a DirectX feature level of 11_1, whereas the GeForce is at 11_0. Neither has ray tracing or tensor cores.

Physical and interface differences matter. The FirePro W4100 is a single-slot card, 171 mm long and 69 mm tall, with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W. It uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 bus interface and outputs to four mini-DisplayPort 1.2 connectors. The GeForce 930A is listed as an IGP (integrated graphics processor), has no recorded dimensions, no power connectors, no suggested PSU, and uses a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface. Its display outputs are described as portable device dependent.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro W4100 wins in memory-bound compute scenarios. Its 64.00 GB/s bandwidth versus 16.02 GB/s means it can feed its 512 shading units far more effectively in OpenCL workloads that stream large data sets. The recorded Geekbench OpenCL score confirms this: 5478 versus 5317, a 3% win. The FirePro also wins the overall average benchmark score comparison by a wide margin, 5987 versus 5317, which is roughly 12.6% higher. Its pixel rate of 10.08 GPixel/s is 33.9% higher than the GeForce’s 7.528 GPixel/s, making it better for fill-rate-bound tasks.

The NVIDIA GeForce 930A wins in raw FP32 compute per watt and texture throughput. Its 722.7 GFLOPS exceeds the FirePro’s 645.1 GFLOPS by about 12%, and its 22.58 GTexel/s texture rate beats the FirePro’s 20.16 GTexel/s by about 12%. This is driven by its boost clock of 941 MHz versus the FirePro’s unlisted clocks. The GeForce also draws less power: 33 W versus 50 W, meaning it generates less heat and requires less cooling. For integrated or portable systems, that lower TDP is a decisive advantage.

The GeForce 930A also wins on Vulkan API version support, offering 1.4 versus the FirePro’s 1.2.170. This newer API version may provide better compatibility with recent Vulkan applications. However, the GeForce has no recorded Vulkan benchmark score, so the practical impact cannot be quantified from the data.

In driver and ecosystem terms, the FirePro W4100 is a professional workstation card with four display outputs, while the GeForce 930A is a mobile-oriented IGP. The FirePro’s multi-display capability is a clear win for multi-monitor setups. The GeForce’s portable device dependent outputs make it unsuitable for fixed desktop multi-display work.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro W4100 scores 5478 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the NVIDIA GeForce 930A scores 5317. The FirePro wins by 3%.

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The FirePro W4100 has 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth from 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. The GeForce 930A has 16.02 GB/s from 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus. The FirePro’s bandwidth is four times higher.

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 compute rating?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 930A has 722.7 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is higher than the AMD FirePro W4100’s 645.1 GFLOPS.

Q: What are the power draw differences?

A: The FirePro W4100 has a 50 W TDP, while the GeForce 930A has a 33 W TDP. The GeForce draws 17 W less.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: Both support DirectX 12, but the FirePro W4100 has feature level 11_1, while the GeForce 930A has feature level 11_0.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The FirePro W4100 has an average benchmark score of 5987, placing it in the 34th percentile of all GPUs. The GeForce 930A has an average score of 5317, placing it in the 31st percentile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only recorded head-to-head benchmark is Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD FirePro W4100 scored 5478, and the NVIDIA GeForce 930A scored 5317. The FirePro wins by a delta of 3%. This is a modest but consistent lead. The FirePro’s win count in head-to-head tests is 1, while the GeForce’s is 0.

Looking at the broader database picture, the FirePro W4100’s average benchmark score of 5987 places it among rivals like the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M (5986, 0% delta), the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 (5982, 0.1% delta), the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server (5996, -0.2% delta), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M (6000, -0.2% delta). This means the FirePro is effectively at parity with a group of mid-range professional and mobile cards, sitting within 0.2% of each.

The GeForce 930A’s average score of 5317 places it near the NVIDIA GeForce 840M (5322, -0.1% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M (5308, 0.2% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce 940M (5284, 0.6% delta), and the AMD Radeon R7 M445 (5358, -0.8% delta). The GeForce 930A is thus clustered with entry-level mobile GPUs, and its score is about 11.2% lower than the FirePro’s average.

The raw compute numbers explain the benchmark outcome only partially. The GeForce 930A has a higher FP32 rating (722.7 GFLOPS) than the FirePro (645.1 GFLOPS), yet it loses in OpenCL. The reason is memory. The FirePro’s 64.00 GB/s bandwidth is four times the GeForce’s 16.02 GB/s. OpenCL workloads often involve large buffer transfers, and the FirePro’s GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus moves data far faster than the GeForce’s DDR3 on a 64-bit bus. The GeForce’s higher core clock (941 MHz boost) cannot compensate for the memory bottleneck.

Pixel throughput also favors the FirePro. Its 10.08 GPixel/s is 33.9% higher than the GeForce’s 7.528 GPixel/s. This comes from having 16 ROPs versus 8. Texture throughput favors the GeForce, with 22.58 GTexel/s versus 20.16 GTexel/s, a 12% advantage. The GeForce’s 24 TMUs at a higher clock beat the FirePro’s 32 TMUs at a lower (or unlisted) clock.

The GeForce 930A’s only recorded benchmark is the OpenCL test. There is no Vulkan score for it. The FirePro W4100 has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 6496, which is higher than its own OpenCL score of 5478. This suggests the FirePro handles Vulkan workloads more efficiently, though no direct comparison with the GeForce is possible since the GeForce lacks a Vulkan score.

In summary, the FirePro W4100 wins the only direct benchmark, holds a significantly higher average score, and offers far superior memory bandwidth. The GeForce 930A wins on FP32 peak compute, texture rate, power efficiency, and API version for Vulkan. For a database-driven verdict, the FirePro W4100 is the stronger compute product, while the GeForce 930A is the more power-conscious mobile part.