AMD FirePro W4170M vs AMD Radeon R7 M340 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in overall benchmark performance?

A: The average benchmark scores are nearly identical. The AMD Radeon R7 M340 averages 5063 points, while the AMD FirePro W4170M averages 5034 points. That is a difference of only 0.6% in favor of the R7 M340, placing both in the 30th percentile of all GPUs.

Q: Which GPU wins the only head-to-head benchmark available?

A: The FirePro W4170M wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 5034 versus the R7 M340’s 4932. The delta is -2%, meaning the FirePro is 2% faster in this specific workload.

Q: Are there differences in memory type and bandwidth that matter?

A: Yes, significantly. The R7 M340 uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 16.00 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro W4170M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. That is a 4x advantage in memory bandwidth for the FirePro.

Q: How do the architectures differ between the two chips?

A: The R7 M340 is built on GCN 3.0 with the Meso chip, while the FirePro W4170M uses GCN 1.0 with the Opal chip. Both are fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but the R7 M340 has a larger die (125 mm²) and more transistors (1,550 million) versus the FirePro’s 77 mm² and 950 million.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units and texture units?

A: The FirePro W4170M has 384 shading units and 24 TMUs, while the R7 M340 has 320 shading units and 20 TMUs. Both have 8 ROPs. The FirePro’s advantage in these units explains its higher theoretical texture rate of 21.60 GTexel/s versus 20.42 GTexel/s.

Q: What about clock speeds and power?

A: The R7 M340 runs at a base clock of 943 MHz and boost of 1021 MHz, while the FirePro W4170M runs at 825 MHz base and 900 MHz boost. Neither GPU has a published TDP in the data, but the FirePro is listed as an MXM Module with no power connectors, whereas the R7 M340 has no slot width or power connector details listed.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the data, the AMD FirePro W4170M edges out the AMD Radeon R7 M340 in the single head-to-head benchmark, winning Geekbench OpenCL with a 2% margin. However, the aggregate picture is almost a dead heat: the R7 M340’s average score of 5063 is only 0.6% higher than the FirePro’s 5034. For a user choosing between these two, the FirePro offers a clear memory bandwidth advantage (64.00 GB/s vs 16.00 GB/s) and more shading units (384 vs 320), which could favor memory-intensive or compute-heavy tasks. The R7 M340 counters with higher clock speeds (1021 MHz boost vs 900 MHz boost) and a newer GCN 3.0 architecture.

Given the data, the FirePro W4170M is the better pick for OpenCL workloads where the head-to-head test shows a win, and its 4x memory bandwidth suggests it will handle larger data sets more gracefully. The R7 M340 is preferable if raw clock speed and a more modern instruction set matter, but the benchmark evidence does not show a decisive advantage in that direction. For most users, the differences are so small that either GPU would perform comparably in general tasks; the FirePro’s memory subsystem is the only statistically meaningful differentiator.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test. Here, the AMD FirePro W4170M scores 5034, while the AMD Radeon R7 M340 scores 4932. The FirePro wins by 2%, which is a narrow but real margin in a compute-oriented benchmark. This result is consistent with the FirePro’s hardware profile: it has 384 shading units versus 320, and 24 TMUs versus 20, giving it more parallel execution resources. The R7 M340’s higher boost clock of 1021 MHz versus 900 MHz helps it close the gap, but not enough to overcome the FirePro’s resource advantage.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each GPU, the R7 M340 sits exactly level with the AMD Radeon R7 240 (both at 5063 average), and is 0.6% ahead of the FirePro. The FirePro, in turn, is 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon R5 M430 (5034 vs 5018) and 0.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics (4998). These delta values are all within noise territory, indicating that all four GPUs — the R7 M340, FirePro W4170M, R7 240, and R5 M430 — cluster tightly around the 5000-point mark. The FirePro’s win in the head-to-head is the only benchmark where a winner is declared, and it is a narrow one.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs diverge most sharply in memory configuration. The R7 M340 uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 16.00 GB/s bandwidth. The FirePro W4170M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 64.00 GB/s. That is a 4x bandwidth difference, which is the single largest specification gap between them.

Clock speeds also differ: the R7 M340 has a base clock of 943 MHz and boost of 1021 MHz, while the FirePro has a base of 825 MHz and boost of 900 MHz. The R7 M340 is 11-12% faster in clock speed, but that advantage is offset by the FirePro’s wider memory bus and faster memory type.

Compute resources: the FirePro has 384 shading units and 24 TMUs, versus 320 shading units and 20 TMUs for the R7 M340. Both have 8 ROPs. Pixel rates are close — the R7 M340 achieves 8.168 GPixel/s, the FirePro 7.200 GPixel/s — but the FirePro’s texture rate of 21.60 GTexel/s beats the R7 M340’s 20.42 GTexel/s. FP32 performance favors the FirePro slightly: 691.2 GFLOPS versus 653.4 GFLOPS.

Form factor: the FirePro is listed as an MXM Module with no power connectors and display outputs described as “Portable Device Dependent.” The R7 M340 has no slot width, power connector, or display output details listed. Both use a PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface.

Architecture Differences

The R7 M340 is built on GCN 3.0 architecture using the Meso chip, while the FirePro W4170M uses GCN 1.0 with the Opal chip. This is a full generation apart in AMD’s GPU design lineage. GCN 3.0 brings architectural refinements that GCN 1.0 lacks, though the benchmark data does not show a clear performance benefit from the newer design.

Manufacturing is identical in process: both use 28 nm at TSMC. However, the R7 M340 packs 1,550 million transistors onto a 125 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.4M / mm². The FirePro has 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, for a density of 12.3M / mm². The R7 M340 is physically larger and more complex, but the FirePro’s simpler GCN 1.0 design still manages competitive compute output.

Memory architecture is a major architectural split. The R7 M340’s DDR3 on a 64-bit bus is a budget-oriented configuration, while the FirePro’s GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus is a workstation-class setup. The FirePro also supports FP16 with a 1:1 ratio (691.2 GFLOPS), while the R7 M340 lists FP16 at 653.4 GFLOPS (also 1:1). API support is nearly identical: both support DirectX 12 (12_0 for the R7 M340, 12_11_1 for the FirePro), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Where Each One Wins

AMD FirePro W4170M wins in scenarios that rely on memory bandwidth. Its 64.00 GB/s GDDR5 configuration is 4x faster than the R7 M340’s DDR3, which means large textures, high-resolution framebuffers, or compute kernels that stream data will run more efficiently. The FirePro also has more shading units (384 vs 320) and higher FP32 throughput (691.2 GFLOPS vs 653.4 GFLOPS), making it the better choice for OpenCL compute tasks — which the head-to-head Geekbench result confirms with a 2% win. Its MXM form factor and no power connectors suggest it is designed for professional mobile workstations, where reliability and memory throughput are prioritized over raw clock speed.

AMD Radeon R7 M340 wins in scenarios where clock speed matters more than memory bandwidth. Its 1021 MHz boost clock is 13% higher than the FirePro’s 900 MHz, which can help in latency-sensitive workloads or lightly-threaded tasks that don’t saturate memory. The R7 M340 also has a higher pixel rate (8.168 GPixel/s vs 7.200 GPixel/s), indicating faster fill-rate for simple rendering passes. Its GCN 3.0 architecture is newer, which may offer better instruction efficiency, though the benchmark data does not quantify this. For general consumer use — casual gaming, video playback, desktop acceleration — the R7 M340’s higher clocks and newer architecture are adequate, and its average benchmark score of 5063 is marginally higher than the FirePro’s 5034.

In practical terms, the data suggests the FirePro is the stronger compute performer, while the R7 M340 is the more balanced consumer option. But neither GPU offers a decisive edge: the 2% head-to-head delta and the 0.6% average score difference are both within the noise of typical benchmark variance. Users should pick the FirePro for professional workloads that leverage memory bandwidth and compute units, and the R7 M340 for scenarios where clock speed and newer architecture are valued.