AMD FirePro W4100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data places the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M and AMD FirePro W4100 in different segments of the performance spectrum. The GeForce GTX 680M posts an average benchmark score of 7023, which places it in the 39th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The FirePro W4100 averages 5987, sitting in the 34th percentile. The gap between them is substantial: in the only shared benchmark test, Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 680M scores 9230 against 5478 for the FirePro W4100, a delta of 68.5% in favor of NVIDIA.

Based on the data, the GeForce GTX 680M is the choice for anyone prioritizing raw compute throughput in OpenCL workloads. It wins the single head-to-head benchmark available, and its average score is 17.3% higher than the FirePro W4100's (7023 versus 5987). The FirePro W4100, meanwhile, offers a different set of strengths: a 50 W TDP versus 100 W, a single-slot form factor, and four display outputs. For a workstation context where multi-display output and low power draw matter more than peak compute, the FirePro W4100 has a clear rationale. For pure performance, the data points unambiguously to the GTX 680M.

Neither card is current; both are marked end-of-life. The GTX 680M belongs to the GeForce 600M generation, while the FirePro W4100 is part of the FirePro GCN (Wx100) generation. The GTX 680M has no Vulkan benchmark score recorded, and the FirePro W4100 has no Geekbench Metal score recorded, so the only direct numeric comparison is OpenCL. Within that single data point, the NVIDIA part leads decisively.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 680M wins the only benchmark where both cards have recorded scores. In Geekbench OpenCL, it delivers 9230 points, which is 68.5% ahead of the FirePro W4100's 5478. This is not a marginal lead; it is a dominant margin that suggests the GTX 680M has significantly higher raw compute throughput in this test.

The FirePro W4100 wins in areas that are not captured by the benchmark suite. It has a 50 W TDP, exactly half of the GTX 680M's 100 W. It is a single-slot card, whereas the GTX 680M is an MXM module. It offers four mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, while the GTX 680M's display outputs are listed as portable device dependent. The FirePro W4100 also has a suggested PSU rating of 250 W, a figure not provided for the GTX 680M. For multi-monitor workstation setups or systems with strict power budgets, the FirePro W4100 is the more practical option.

The FirePro W4100 also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 6496, a test the GTX 680M does not have in the database. Conversely, the GTX 680M has a Geekbench Metal score of 4815, a test the FirePro W4100 lacks. These are separate data points, not direct comparisons, but they indicate that each card has been validated in different API environments.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architects and different eras. The GTX 680M uses the GK104 chip, built on NVIDIA's Kepler architecture. It is manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The chip contains 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.0 million per square millimeter. The FirePro W4100 uses the Cape Verde chip, built on AMD's GCN 1.0 architecture. It is also manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but the chip is far smaller: 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, with a transistor density of 12.2 million per square millimeter. Both chips have nearly identical transistor density, but the GK104 is a much larger and more complex chip.

The GTX 680M has 1344 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The FirePro W4100 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The GTX 680M has more than double the shading units and more than triple the texture units. The pixel rate of the GTX 680M is 21.22 GPixel/s, compared to 10.08 GPixel/s for the FirePro W4100. The texture rate is 84.90 GTexel/s versus 20.16 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 2.038 TFLOPS for the GTX 680M and 645.1 GFLOPS for the FirePro W4100. The GTX 680M is larger in every compute dimension.

Memory configurations differ as well. The GTX 680M has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, with bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The FirePro W4100 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, with bandwidth of 64.00 GB/s. The GTX 680M has double the memory capacity and nearly double the bandwidth. Memory clocks are listed as 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective) for the GTX 680M and 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) for the FirePro W4100, but the wider bus of the GTX 680M makes its overall bandwidth higher.

The GTX 680M has a base clock of 719 MHz and a boost clock of 758 MHz. The FirePro W4100 has no base or boost clock listed in the database. The GTX 680M's TDP is 100 W, the FirePro W4100's is 50 W.

The bus interfaces differ. The GTX 680M uses MXM-B (3.0), a mobile module standard. The FirePro W4100 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The GTX 680M's slot width is listed as MXM Module, while the FirePro W4100 is a single-slot card with a length of 171 mm (6.7 inches) and a height of 69 mm (2.7 inches). The GTX 680M has no physical dimensions recorded.

API support shows minor differences. The GTX 680M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The FirePro W4100 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The DirectX level differs slightly: 11_0 versus 11_1. Neither card lists RT cores or tensor cores.

Release dates differ by about two years. The GTX 680M was released on 2012-06-03, and the FirePro W4100 on 2014-08-12. The GTX 680M's predecessor is GeForce 500M and its successor is GeForce 700M. The FirePro W4100's predecessor is FirePro Terascale and its successor is Radeon Pro Polaris.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M, with an average score of 7023, compared to 5987 for the AMD FirePro W4100. The GTX 680M also sits in the 39th percentile of all GPUs, versus the 34th percentile for the FirePro W4100.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the shared OpenCL benchmark?

A: The GTX 680M scores 9230 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the FirePro W4100 scores 5478. The GTX 680M leads by 68.5%.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient?

A: The FirePro W4100 has a 50 W TDP, half of the GTX 680M's 100 W TDP. It also has a suggested PSU rating of 250 W, a figure not listed for the GTX 680M.

Q: Which card supports more display outputs?

A: The FirePro W4100 has 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. The GTX 680M's display outputs are listed as portable device dependent.

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan (1.2.175 for the GTX 680M, 1.2.170 for the FirePro W4100). The GTX 680M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the FirePro W4100 supports DirectX 12 (11_1).

Q: Are these cards still in production?

A: No. Both are marked end-of-life in the database. The GTX 680M was released on 2012-06-03, and the FirePro W4100 on 2014-08-12.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one direct head-to-head benchmark between these two cards: Geekbench OpenCL. The GTX 680M records 9230 points, and the FirePro W4100 records 5478 points. The delta is 68.5% in favor of the GTX 680M. This is a wide margin, and it aligns with the architectural differences: the GTX 680M has 1344 shading units versus 512, 112 TMUs versus 32, and 32 ROPs versus 16. Its FP32 throughput is 2.038 TFLOPS, more than three times the FirePro W4100's 645.1 GFLOPS.

The GTX 680M's average benchmark score of 7023 puts it in proximity to several rivals in the database. The NVIDIA T600 averages 7035, a delta of -0.2% (the T600 is slightly higher). The AMD Radeon R5 M240 averages 6975, a delta of 0.7% (the GTX 680M is slightly higher). The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M averages 6946, a delta of 1.1% (GTX 680M higher). The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 averages 7157, a delta of -1.9% (GTX 970 higher). The GTX 680M is thus clustered tightly with these four cards, all within roughly two percentage points of each other.

The FirePro W4100's average score of 5987 places it near a different set of rivals. The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M averages 5986, a delta of 0%. The NVIDIA Quadro K4000 averages 5982, a delta of 0.1% (FirePro slightly higher). The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server averages 5996, a delta of -0.2% (that card slightly higher). The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M averages 6000, a delta of -0.2% (GTX 770M slightly higher). The FirePro W4100 is essentially tied with all four of these cards, with deltas no larger than 0.2%.

The GTX 680M also has a Geekbench Metal score of 4815, which is not a direct comparison since the FirePro W4100 has no Metal score recorded. The FirePro W4100 has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 6496, a test the GTX 680M does not have in the database. These scores cannot be compared directly, but they do show that each card has been exercised in different API environments.

The overall picture from the head-to-head data is clear: in the one test where both cards appear, the GTX 680M wins by a wide margin. The nearest rivals of each card reinforce the separation. The GTX 680M competes with cards in the 6900 to 7200 average score range, while the FirePro W4100 competes with cards in the 5980 to 6000 range. These are different performance tiers.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification field in the database.

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M | AMD FirePro W4100 |

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

| Chip | GK104 | Cape Verde |

| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 1.0 |

| Generation | GeForce 600M | FirePro GCN (Wx100) |

| Process node | 28 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | 3,540 million | 1,500 million |

| Die size | 294 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Transistor density | 12.0M / mm² | 12.2M / mm² |

| Base clock | 719 MHz | Not listed |

| Boost clock | 758 MHz | Not listed |

| Memory clock | 900 MHz, 3.6 Gbps effective | 1000 MHz, 4 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 4 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |

| Memory bus width | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 115.2 GB/s | 64.00 GB/s |

| Shading units | 1344 | 512 |

| TMUs | 112 | 32 |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| Pixel rate | 21.22 GPixel/s | 10.08 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 84.90 GTexel/s | 20.16 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.038 TFLOPS | 645.1 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 100 W | 50 W |

| Slot width | MXM Module | Single-slot |

| Power connectors | None | None |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 250 W |

| Bus interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | Portable device dependent | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 |

| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (11_1) |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.2.175 | 1.2.170 |

| Length | Not listed | 171 mm (6.7 inches) |

| Height | Not listed | 69 mm (2.7 inches) |

| Release date | 2012-06-03 | 2014-08-12 |

| Predecessor | GeForce 500M | FirePro Terascale |

| Successor | GeForce 700M | Radeon Pro Polaris |

| Production status | End-of-life | End-of-life |

The GTX 680M is the larger, more powerful part in almost every compute metric. The FirePro W4100 is the lower-power, workstation-oriented card with a smaller footprint and more display outputs. Neither has a launch MSRP in the database.