AMD FirePro W4100 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro W4100 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M split their two recorded benchmark wins exactly one apiece, but the nature of those wins tells a clear story about their respective strengths. The AMD card takes the Vulkan test decisively, scoring 6496 against the GTX 760M's 4868, a 33.4% advantage. This is the largest performance gap in any comparison between these two cards. The NVIDIA card, meanwhile, wins the OpenCL test with 5604 versus 5478 for the AMD, a much narrower 2.2% margin. For anyone prioritizing modern graphics API performance, particularly Vulkan workloads, the FirePro W4100 is the clear choice. For legacy OpenCL compute tasks, the GTX 760M holds a smaller but real edge.

The benchmark averages reinforce this split. The FirePro W4100 posts an average benchmark score of 5987, placing it at the 34th percentile among all GPUs in the database. The GTX 760M averages 5236, sitting at the 31st percentile. That 751-point gap in average scores reflects the AMD card's strong Vulkan showing, which lifts its overall standing. The data suggests the FirePro W4100 is the more balanced performer across the two tested APIs, while the GTX 760M is competitive primarily in OpenCL.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each card provides additional context. The FirePro W4100's average score of 5987 puts it within 0.2% of the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server (5996) and 0.1% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 (5982). It also matches the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M (5986) within rounding. The GTX 760M's average of 5236 places it 1.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 M260X (5161) and 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M (5211), while trailing the NVIDIA GeForce 940M (5284) by 0.9% and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M (5308) by 1.3%. These proximity figures show that neither card is an outlier in its performance class; both sit comfortably among mid-range mobile and workstation parts from their respective eras.

The Verdict

The choice between these two cards comes down to the workload. The AMD FirePro W4100 is the pick for Vulkan-based applications and for anyone who wants the higher overall benchmark average. Its 33.4% lead in the Vulkan test is the single most decisive data point in this comparison, and its average score of 5987 versus 5236 for the GTX 760M represents a 14.3% advantage overall. The GTX 760M, by contrast, is the choice for OpenCL compute tasks where its 2.2% edge, while modest, is consistent and measurable.

For a professional or workstation context, the FirePro W4100's architecture and driver focus on compute and professional visualization align with its Vulkan strength. The GTX 760M, being a mobile consumer part, offers no such professional positioning. The database records show the FirePro W4100 ending with one win and the GTX 760M with one win, so neither card dominates the other outright. The user's priority should be the API they actually use. If Vulkan is in the picture, the AMD card wins without hesitation. If OpenCL is the only concern, the NVIDIA card is marginally better.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The OpenCL test is the closer of the two. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M scores 5604, while the AMD FirePro W4100 scores 5478. The 2.2% delta translates to 126 points. This is a small but real lead for NVIDIA. In practical terms, OpenCL workloads that are compute-bound will see a slight edge on the GTX 760M, though the difference is within the range where driver versions or workload characteristics could shift the outcome. The GTX 760M's higher shading unit count, 768 versus 512 for the AMD card, likely contributes to this OpenCL advantage, as does its higher FP32 throughput of 1,104.4 GFLOPS versus 645.1 GFLOPS.

The Vulkan test is where the FirePro W4100 separates itself. Its score of 6496 dwarfs the GTX 760M's 4868, a 33.4% delta that represents 1,628 points. This is a decisive victory. The AMD card's GCN 1.0 architecture, despite being older, handles Vulkan workloads substantially better than the NVIDIA Kepler part. The FirePro W4100's Vulkan API support at version 1.2.170 versus the GTX 760M's 1.2.175 is nearly identical, so the performance gap is not a feature-support issue. The data indicates a fundamental architectural efficiency difference in Vulkan execution.

When these two scores are averaged, the FirePro W4100's total of 5987 sits well above the GTX 760M's 5236. The Vulkan result is the primary driver of that gap. The OpenCL result, while a win for NVIDIA, is too narrow to offset the Vulkan deficit. For a user running a mix of both APIs, the AMD card is the better all-around choice based on the recorded data.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro W4100 averages 5987 across its two benchmark results, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M averages 5236. The AMD card holds a 751-point advantage in average score.

Q: Is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M better in any benchmark?

A: Yes, the GTX 760M wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 5604 compared to the FirePro W4100's 5478, a 2.2% margin.

Q: How large is the AMD FirePro W4100's Vulkan advantage?

A: The FirePro W4100 scores 6496 in the Geekbench Vulkan test, while the GTX 760M scores 4868. That is a 33.4% lead for the AMD card.

Q: How do these cards compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The FirePro W4100's average of 5987 is essentially tied with the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M (5986) and Quadro K4000 (5982), and within 0.2% of the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server (5996). The GTX 760M's average of 5236 is 1.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 M260X (5161) and 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M (5211), but 0.9% behind the NVIDIA GeForce 940M (5284) and 1.3% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M (5308).

Q: Do both cards support the same modern APIs?

A: Both support DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6. The FirePro W4100 supports Vulkan 1.2.170, and the GTX 760M supports Vulkan 1.2.175, so the API versions are effectively comparable.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M has 768 shading units, while the AMD FirePro W4100 has 512. The GTX 760M also has 64 texture mapping units versus 32 for the AMD card, and both have 16 ROPs.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural lineages. The AMD FirePro W4100 uses the Cape Verde chip built on GCN 1.0, AMD's first-generation Graphics Core Next architecture. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M uses the GK106S chip built on Kepler, NVIDIA's architecture from the same era. Both are manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but the similarities end there.

The transistor counts diverge significantly. The GTX 760M packs 2,540 million transistors onto a 221 mm² die, while the FirePro W4100 uses 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. The transistor density favors AMD at 12.2 million transistors per mm² versus 11.5 million for NVIDIA. The larger Kepler die gives NVIDIA more raw hardware resources: 768 shading units and 64 texture mapping units versus 512 shading units and 32 texture mapping units for AMD. Both cards have 16 ROPs.

The memory configuration is nearly identical. Both cards use 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. The GTX 760M's memory runs at 1002 MHz with 4 Gbps effective, yielding 64.13 GB/s of bandwidth. The FirePro W4100's memory runs at 1000 MHz with 4 Gbps effective, yielding 64.00 GB/s. The 0.13 GB/s difference is negligible.

The architecture generations differ in their API maturity. The FirePro W4100 belongs to the FirePro GCN (Wx100) generation, while the GTX 760M belongs to the GeForce 700M generation. The AMD card was released later, on August 12, 2014, compared to May 29, 2013 for the NVIDIA part. This release timing may explain why the AMD card handles Vulkan more efficiently despite its older GCN 1.0 roots. The GTX 760M's predecessor is the GeForce 600M, and its successor is the GeForce 800M. The FirePro W4100's predecessor is FirePro Terascale, and its successor is Radeon Pro Polaris.

Specification Differences

The physical and power specifications reveal different design philosophies. The FirePro W4100 is a single-slot desktop workstation card with a length of 171 mm (6.7 inches) and a height of 69 mm (2.7 inches). It requires no power connectors and has a suggested power supply of 250 W. The GTX 760M is an MXM module for laptops, with dimensions that are portable-device dependent. It also requires no power connectors, but no suggested PSU is recorded for it.

The TDP difference is modest but relevant. The FirePro W4100 draws 50 W, while the GTX 760M draws 55 W. Both are efficient parts, but the AMD card is slightly cooler-running. The clock behavior also differs. The GTX 760M has recorded base and boost clocks of 628 MHz and 719 MHz respectively, while the FirePro W4100 has no recorded base or boost clocks, only its memory clock of 1000 MHz. This means the GTX 760M's compute rates are known: 11.50 GPixel/s pixel rate, 46.02 GTexel/s texture rate, and 1,104.4 GFLOPS FP32. The FirePro W4100's rates are lower: 10.08 GPixel/s, 20.16 GTexel/s, and 645.1 GFLOPS FP32.

The display outputs differ substantially. The FirePro W4100 offers 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, making it suitable for multi-monitor professional setups. The GTX 760M's display outputs are listed as portable device dependent, meaning they vary by laptop implementation. The bus interface is the same for both: PCIe 3.0 x16. The FirePro W4100's production status is end-of-life, as is the GTX 760M's. Neither card has a recorded launch MSRP in the database.