AMD FirePro W4170M vs AMD Radeon R7 M265 Comparison

The AMD FirePro W4170M and AMD Radeon R7 M265 are both built on the same fundamental architecture, yet the data reveals a clear performance hierarchy between them. The FirePro W4170M, a professional mobile workstation part, edges out the consumer-oriented R7 M265 in the sole benchmark recorded. This analysis explores the numeric differences, architectural similarities, and the implications for each product’s intended role.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison contains a single data point: the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this benchmark, the AMD FirePro W4170M scored 5034, while the AMD Radeon R7 M265 scored 4929. This yields a delta of 2.1% in favor of the FirePro, marking the only win for either product in the direct comparison. The FirePro’s victory is narrow but consistent with its higher clock speeds.

Looking at the broader competitive landscape, the FirePro W4170M sits in the 30th percentile of all GPUs, while the R7 M265 sits just below at the 29th percentile. The FirePro’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R7 M340 and R7 240, both scoring 5063, which is 0.6% higher than the FirePro. It also edges out the Radeon R5 M430 by 0.3% and the Radeon R7 Graphics by 0.7%. This places the FirePro in a tight cluster of low-end mobile and desktop parts where performance differences are measured in fractions of a percent.

The R7 M265’s nearest rivals tell a similar story. The AMD Radeon R7 M360 scores 4931, virtually identical to the M265’s 4929. The AMD FirePro W5130M scores 4904, which is 0.5% lower. Interestingly, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB appears in this list with a score of 4901, 0.6% lower, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 scores 4893, 0.7% lower. The inclusion of a modern RTX card in this low-end group underscores how the M265 and its peers represent a performance tier that has long been surpassed, yet the M265 still manages to outperform those specific NVIDIA entries in this OpenCL workload.

The data indicates that while the FirePro W4170M wins the direct comparison, the margin is small enough that real-world application differences could be negligible. The 2.1% advantage in OpenCL compute is a measurable, but not transformative, lead.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro W4170M scores 5034, while the AMD Radeon R7 M265 scores 4929, giving the FirePro a 2.1% lead in this test.

Q: How do these two GPUs compare to their nearest competitors?

A: The FirePro W4170M is within 0.7% of its closest rivals, with the Radeon R7 M340 and R7 240 scoring 0.6% higher. The R7 M265 is essentially tied with the Radeon R7 M360, which scores 4931, a 0% delta.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two?

A: The FirePro W4170M offers 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth, while the R7 M265 provides 28.80 GB/s. This is a substantial difference, with the FirePro delivering more than double the bandwidth.

Q: Do both GPUs share the same chip and architecture?

A: Yes, both use the Opal chip based on GCN 1.0 architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process with 950 million transistors.

Q: What are the base and boost clock speeds?

A: The FirePro W4170M runs at 825 MHz base and 900 MHz boost. The R7 M265 runs at 725 MHz base and 825 MHz boost, making the FirePro consistently faster in clock terms.

Q: Which GPU has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The FirePro W4170M ranks in the 30th percentile, while the R7 M265 ranks in the 29th percentile, indicating the FirePro is slightly higher in the overall performance distribution.

Architecture Differences

Both the AMD FirePro W4170M and the AMD Radeon R7 M265 are built on the same underlying architecture, which makes their performance differences primarily a matter of configuration. The chip for both is the "Opal," based on the GCN 1.0 architecture from AMD. The manufacturing process is identical: 28 nm at TSMC, with 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 12.3M per mm². This shared foundation means the core compute resources are the same in quantity.

Both GPUs feature 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 8 render output units (ROPs). The pixel rate for the FirePro is 7.200 GPixel/s, while the R7 M265 achieves 6.600 GPixel/s. The texture rate also favors the FirePro at 21.60 GTexel/s versus 19.80 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute performance is 691.2 GFLOPS for the FirePro and 633.6 GFLOPS for the R7 M265. These differences are directly attributable to the clock speeds.

The core clock speeds are the first major divergence. The FirePro W4170M has a base clock of 825 MHz and a boost clock of 900 MHz. The R7 M265 has a base clock of 725 MHz and a boost clock of 825 MHz. The 100 MHz gap in base clock and 75 MHz gap in boost clock explain the higher fill rates and compute throughput of the FirePro.

The most significant architectural difference, however, lies in the memory subsystem. The FirePro W4170M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, running at 1000 MHz with an effective data rate of 4 Gbps. This yields a memory bandwidth of 64.00 GB/s. The R7 M265 uses 2 GB of DDR3 memory on the same 128-bit bus, but at 900 MHz with an effective rate of 1800 Mbps. This results in a memory bandwidth of only 28.80 GB/s. The FirePro’s memory bandwidth is more than double that of the R7 M265, a crucial factor for memory-intensive workloads.

Both GPUs support the same API levels: DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both use a PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface. The FirePro W4170M is an MXM Module with no power connectors, while the R7 M265 has no listed slot width or power connector specifications. The FirePro’s display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," while the R7 M265 has no display output information listed.

The Verdict

The data clearly indicates that the AMD FirePro W4170M is the faster GPU in this pairing. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark with a 2.1% lead in OpenCL compute. This advantage is supported by its higher clock speeds, higher pixel and texture rates, and significantly higher memory bandwidth.

The FirePro’s edge in memory bandwidth is the most compelling reason for its superior performance. With 64.00 GB/s versus the R7 M265’s 28.80 GB/s, the FirePro is better equipped to feed its 384 shading units. For compute tasks that are memory-bound, this difference could be far more impactful than the 2.1% OpenCL score suggests. The FirePro also benefits from a higher boost clock of 900 MHz versus 825 MHz, allowing it to sustain higher throughput under load.

For users choosing between these two, the FirePro W4170M is the clear choice for any workload that demands higher compute throughput or memory bandwidth. Its professional heritage, indicated by the FirePro naming and MXM form factor, suggests it was designed for more sustained, reliable operation in workstation-class laptops. The R7 M265, while slower, still offers comparable core resources and may be sufficient for lighter duties, but the data shows no benchmark where it outperforms the FirePro.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in several key specification fields, despite sharing the same chip and core configuration.

The clock speeds are different. The FirePro W4170M has a base clock of 825 MHz and a boost clock of 900 MHz. The R7 M265 has a base clock of 725 MHz and a boost clock of 825 MHz.

The memory type and speed differ significantly. The FirePro uses GDDR5 memory at 1000 MHz with 4 Gbps effective, while the R7 M265 uses DDR3 at 900 MHz with 1800 Mbps effective. Both have 2 GB of memory on a 128-bit bus, but the bandwidth is 64.00 GB/s for the FirePro and 28.80 GB/s for the R7 M265.

Performance rates differ accordingly. The FirePro achieves a pixel rate of 7.200 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 21.60 GTexel/s. The R7 M265 achieves 6.600 GPixel/s and 19.80 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 691.2 GFLOPS for the FirePro and 633.6 GFLOPS for the R7 M265.

The form factor and release timing differ. The FirePro is listed as an MXM Module with no power connectors, while the R7 M265 has no slot width or power connector data. The FirePro was released on 2015-04-22, while the R7 M265 was released earlier on 2014-01-08. The generation names also differ, with the FirePro in the "FirePro Mobile (Wx100M)" generation and the R7 M265 in the "Gem System (R7 M200)" generation.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro W4170M wins in every measurable benchmark category. It has a higher OpenCL score, higher clock speeds, higher pixel and texture fill rates, and double the memory bandwidth. The data suggests it is the superior choice for compute-intensive applications that leverage OpenCL, as well as tasks that require high memory throughput.

The R7 M265’s only potential advantage lies in its earlier release date, which might indicate it was available in a wider range of budget laptops during its lifecycle. However, there is no benchmark data to suggest it wins in any performance category. The nearest rivals of the R7 M265 include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB, but the M265 scores 0.6% higher in OpenCL, which is a surprising but data-backed result.

In summary, the FirePro W4170M is the clear winner for users prioritizing compute performance. The R7 M265, while based on the same silicon, is hamstrung by lower clocks and, most critically, its DDR3 memory interface. For any workload where memory bandwidth is a bottleneck, the FirePro’s 64.00 GB/s versus the R7 M265’s 28.80 GB/s is a decisive factor. The FirePro is the recommended pick based on the available data, offering a consistent, if modest, performance lead.