AMD FirePro W4170M vs AMD Radeon R5 M255 Comparison

The AMD FirePro W4170M and the AMD Radeon R5 M255 are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions from AMD, but they target different priorities. The data shows a clear performance leader in OpenCL compute, yet the R5 M255 counters with a more modern feature set and a different memory architecture. The FirePro W4170M wins the only direct benchmark comparison, but the R5 M255 offers a higher specification in several key areas. This analysis breaks down the benchmark results, architectural differences, and the practical implications for each GPU.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data presents a straightforward split: the FirePro W4170M wins in raw compute performance, while the Radeon R5 M255 wins on architectural modernity and memory technology. In the sole head-to-head benchmark available, Geekbench OpenCL, the FirePro W4170M scores 5034 against the R5 M255's 4650, a decisive 8.3% advantage. This indicates the FirePro is the stronger choice for compute-heavy workloads that leverage OpenCL, such as professional rendering, scientific calculations, or GPGPU acceleration.

The R5 M255, however, claims superiority in other measurable aspects. Its base clock is 925 MHz versus 825 MHz, and its boost clock reaches 940 MHz versus 900 MHz. This higher clock speed contributes to a slightly higher pixel rate of 7.520 GPixel/s (versus 7.200 GPixel/s) and a texture rate of 22.56 GTexel/s (versus 21.60 GTexel/s). While these differences are small, they suggest the R5 M255 has a marginal edge in traditional rasterization throughput, which could translate to better performance in some gaming scenarios. Furthermore, the R5 M255 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the FirePro W4170M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1). This is a significant feature win for the R5 M255, as it allows for more advanced graphics API features.

The FirePro W4170M also holds a percentile advantage, sitting at the 30th percentile of all GPUs, while the R5 M255 sits at the 28th. Its average benchmark score is 5034, compared to the R5 M255's average of 4788. The R5 M255's nearest rival list includes the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 12 GB, with a deltaPct of -0.1% (meaning the R5 M255 scores 0.1% lower), which is an outlier comparison that puts its performance in perspective. The FirePro’s rivals are all AMD integrated or low-end discrete parts, showing it sits in a similar performance class.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on different generations of AMD's Graphics Core Next (GCN) architecture. The FirePro W4170M is based on GCN 1.0 with the chip codenamed "Opal", while the Radeon R5 M255 is based on GCN 3.0 with the chip codenamed "Topaz". This is a substantial generational leap, with GCN 3.0 offering architectural improvements over the original GCN design. The manufacturing process is identical at 28 nm from TSMC, but the chips differ significantly in size and complexity.

The FirePro's "Opal" chip is smaller, with a die size of 77 mm² and 950 million transistors. In contrast, the R5 M255's "Topaz" chip is much larger at 125 mm² and contains 1,550 million transistors. This represents a large increase in transistor count, which is likely used for the newer architecture's features and improved IPC. The transistor density is nearly identical (12.3M / mm² for the FirePro versus 12.4M / mm² for the R5 M255), confirming the size difference is due to more transistors, not a denser layout.

The memory subsystem is another major architectural divergence. The FirePro W4170M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 64.00 GB/s. The Radeon R5 M255 also has 2 GB of memory and a 128-bit bus, but it uses slower DDR3 memory, halving the bandwidth to 32.00 GB/s. This is a critical difference. While the R5 M255 has a faster GPU core, its memory bandwidth is severely constrained, which can bottleneck performance in memory-intensive tasks. The FirePro, with its GDDR5, has a clear advantage in this regard.

Finally, the R5 M255 supports FP16 computation at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, offering 721.9 GFLOPS of FP16 performance. The FirePro W4170M has no listed FP16 capability. This makes the R5 M255 more versatile for workloads that can utilize half-precision arithmetic, a feature increasingly common in AI and machine learning applications.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, provides a clear verdict. The FirePro W4170M scores 5034, while the Radeon R5 M255 scores 4650. The deltaPct of 8.3% in favor of the FirePro is substantial and shows that despite the R5 M255's newer architecture and higher clock speeds, the FirePro's superior memory bandwidth (64.00 GB/s vs 32.00 GB/s) is the deciding factor in this compute test. The OpenCL workload is highly sensitive to memory bandwidth, and the GDDR5 memory of the FirePro provides a significant advantage over the DDR3 of the R5 M255.

The R5 M255 has no benchmark win against the FirePro in the provided data. While it has higher pixel and texture rates, these do not translate to a win in the Geekbench OpenCL test. The FirePro wins the only head-to-head contest, giving it a 1-0 record in wins. The FirePro's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon R7 M340, scores 5063, which is only 0.6% higher than the FirePro. This shows the FirePro is competitive within its immediate performance class. The R5 M255, on the other hand, is 1.2% slower than the NVIDIA GeForce 940MX, which scores 4844.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the data, the FirePro W4170M is the better choice for compute-focused tasks. Its significant 8.3% lead in Geekbench OpenCL, combined with its higher memory bandwidth and better overall percentile ranking, makes it the superior GPU for professional applications that rely on OpenCL acceleration. The FirePro is also the more consistent performer, with its average score of 5034 matching its single benchmark score.

The Radeon R5 M255 is the better choice for users who prioritize a newer feature set and potentially better gaming performance. Its support for DirectX 12 (12_0) is a major advantage over the FirePro's DirectX 12 (11_1), ensuring compatibility with a wider range of modern games and applications. Its higher clock speeds and pixel/texture rates suggest it could perform better in fill-rate-bound scenarios, despite its memory bandwidth limitation. The R5 M255 also offers FP16 support, which is absent on the FirePro.

For a user deciding between these two, the choice comes down to workload. If the primary use case is professional compute, rendering, or any OpenCL-heavy task, the FirePro W4170M is the clear winner. If the use case is general-purpose mobile graphics, gaming, or applications that leverage newer DirectX 12 features, the R5 M255 is the more future-proof option, despite its lower raw compute score.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The AMD FirePro W4170M is faster, scoring 5034 compared to the AMD Radeon R5 M255's 4650, an 8.3% difference.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon R5 M255 have any performance advantages over the FirePro W4170M?

A: Yes, the R5 M255 has higher clock speeds (925 MHz base vs 825 MHz, and 940 MHz boost vs 900 MHz) and slightly higher pixel and texture rates.

Q: What is the main difference in memory configuration?

A: The FirePro W4170M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 64.00 GB/s, while the Radeon R5 M255 uses 2 GB of DDR3 memory with a bandwidth of 32.00 GB/s.

Q: Which GPU supports a more modern version of DirectX?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M255 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the AMD FirePro W4170M supports DirectX 12 (11_1).

Q: Are both GPUs based on the same architecture?

A: No. The FirePro W4170M is based on GCN 1.0, while the Radeon R5 M255 is based on the newer GCN 3.0 architecture.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor count?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M255 has 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die, compared to the FirePro W4170M's 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FirePro W4170M | AMD Radeon R5 M255 |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Chip | Opal | Topaz |

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | GCN 3.0 |

| Generation | FirePro Mobile (Wx100M) | Gem System (R5 M200) |

| Transistors | 950 million | 1,550 million |

| Die Size | 77 mm² | 125 mm² |

| Base Clock | 825 MHz | 925 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 900 MHz | 940 MHz |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 64.00 GB/s | 32.00 GB/s |

| Pixel Rate | 7.200 GPixel/s | 7.520 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 21.60 GTexel/s | 22.56 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 691.2 GFLOPS | 721.9 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | Not listed | 721.9 GFLOPS (1:1) |

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

| Release Date | 2015-04-22 | 2014-10-11 |

| Predecessor | FirePro Mobility | Solar System |

| Successor | Radeon Pro Mobile | Polaris Mobile |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Not listed |

| Power Connectors | None | Not listed |