AMD FirePro W4170M vs AMD Radeon R7 M360 Comparison

The AMD FirePro W4170M and AMD Radeon R7 M360 are two mobile GPUs from the same manufacturer, aimed at different segments of the laptop market. The FirePro W4170M carries the professional workstation pedigree, while the Radeon R7 M360 targets mainstream consumer notebooks. Both are now end-of-life products, but benchmark data from the Geekbench suite provides a clear picture of their respective performance envelopes.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark available is Geekbench OpenCL. In this test, the AMD FirePro W4170M scores 5034 points, while the AMD Radeon R7 M360 scores 4638 points. This gives the FirePro W4170M a decisive 8.5% advantage. It is a clear win for the professional part, though the margin is not enormous.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the FirePro W4170M’s average benchmark score is 5034, which places it in the 30th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R5 M430 (average score 5018, deltaPct 0.3), the AMD Radeon R7 M340 (average score 5063, deltaPct -0.6), and the AMD Radeon R7 240 (average score 5063, deltaPct -0.6). The FirePro W4170M is essentially neck-and-neck with these parts, with the largest gap being a 0.7% advantage over the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics (average score 4998). This suggests the FirePro W4170M sits in a crowded performance tier, where even small clock or memory differences can flip the order.

The AMD Radeon R7 M360, with an average benchmark score of 4931, sits in the 29th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R7 M265 (average score 4929, deltaPct 0), the AMD FirePro W5130M (average score 4904, deltaPct 0.6), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB (average score 4901, deltaPct 0.6). The R7 M360 is essentially tied with these parts, with the largest delta being a 0.8% lead over the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 (average score 4893). While the R7 M360 also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 5223, this test has no corresponding result for the FirePro W4170M, so a direct comparison cannot be made on that API.

The 8.5% gap between the two cards in OpenCL is notable. The FirePro W4170M achieves this despite having a lower base clock of 825 MHz and boost clock of 900 MHz, compared to the R7 M360’s 1100 MHz base and 1125 MHz boost. This indicates that the FirePro’s advantage comes from other architectural factors, not raw clock speed.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on different generations of AMD’s Graphics Core Next (GCN) architecture. The AMD FirePro W4170M utilizes the Opal chip, which is based on GCN 1.0. In contrast, the AMD Radeon R7 M360 uses the Meso chip, based on the newer GCN 3.0 architecture. Both are manufactured on the same 28 nm process node at TSMC, but the transistor counts differ significantly.

The FirePro W4170M’s Opal chip packs 950 million transistors on a die size of 77 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 12.3 million transistors per square millimeter. The R7 M360’s Meso chip is substantially larger, with 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die, yielding a density of 12.4 million transistors per square millimeter. Despite having 63% more transistors, the R7 M360 does not translate that into a benchmark win in OpenCL, highlighting the efficiency of the older GCN 1.0 design in this particular workload.

Both GPUs feature the same core counts: 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 8 render output units (ROPs). This parity in the compute core layout means the architectural differences come down to clock speeds, memory subsystems, and feature support. The FirePro W4170M has a base clock of 825 MHz and a boost clock of 900 MHz, while the R7 M360 runs at 1100 MHz base and 1125 MHz boost, giving the latter a roughly 25% clock speed advantage.

Memory is a major differentiator. The FirePro W4170M comes equipped with 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering a memory bandwidth of 64.00 GB/s. The memory clock is 1000 MHz, which translates to 4 Gbps effective. The R7 M360, on the other hand, uses 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing only 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. Its memory clock is 900 MHz, or 1800 Mbps effective. This is a dramatic difference: the FirePro W4170M has more than four times the memory bandwidth of the R7 M360.

In terms of API support, the FirePro W4170M supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the R7 M360 supports DirectX 12 (12_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170. The R7 M360 also has a listed FP16 performance of 864.0 GFLOPS (1:1), whereas the FirePro W4170M does not have a listed FP16 figure. The FP32 performance is 691.2 GFLOPS for the FirePro and 864.0 GFLOPS for the R7 M360, reflecting the latter’s higher clock speed.

The FirePro W4170M is a MXM Module form factor with no power connectors, while the R7 M360’s slot width and power connector details are not specified. Both use a PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface. The FirePro W4170M’s display outputs are listed as “Portable Device Dependent,” while the R7 M360 has no display output information provided.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro W4170M wins in the single available benchmark, the Geekbench OpenCL test, by 8.5%. This is likely attributable to its vastly superior memory bandwidth of 64.00 GB/s versus the R7 M360’s 14.40 GB/s. For compute-heavy workloads that are memory-bandwidth sensitive, such as OpenCL-based tasks, the FirePro W4170M holds the edge. Its professional FirePro branding also suggests it is intended for workstation applications, where OpenCL compute performance is often a priority.

The AMD Radeon R7 M360, despite losing the OpenCL test, has its own strengths. Its higher clock speeds (1100 MHz base, 1125 MHz boost) translate to higher theoretical pixel rate (9.000 GPixel/s versus 7.200 GPixel/s) and texture rate (27.00 GTexel/s versus 21.60 GTexel/s). It also has a higher FP32 throughput of 864.0 GFLOPS. In workloads that are primarily shader-bound and not limited by memory bandwidth, the R7 M360 could potentially outperform the FirePro W4170M, though the benchmark data does not directly confirm this.

The R7 M360 also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 5223, which is higher than its OpenCL score. This suggests it may be more capable in Vulkan-based applications, though without a comparable FirePro W4170M Vulkan score, a direct comparison remains speculative. The R7 M360’s support for DirectX 12 (12_0) is a full feature level, while the FirePro W4170M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1), which could matter for newer games or applications that require the higher feature level.

For gaming use cases, the R7 M360’s higher clock speeds and full DirectX 12 (12_0) support may be more relevant. However, its DDR3 memory and narrow 64-bit bus will likely bottleneck performance in texture-heavy scenarios. The FirePro W4170M’s GDDR5 memory and 128-bit bus provide a significant bandwidth advantage that could help in higher resolution or higher quality settings.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The AMD FirePro W4170M scores 5034 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 8.5% higher than the AMD Radeon R7 M360’s score of 4638.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each GPU?

A: The FirePro W4170M has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. The R7 M360 has 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do the core counts compare between the two cards?

A: Both the FirePro W4170M and the R7 M360 have identical core configurations: 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs.

Q: Which GPU has higher clock speeds?

A: The R7 M360 has a base clock of 1100 MHz and a boost clock of 1125 MHz. The FirePro W4170M has a base clock of 825 MHz and a boost clock of 900 MHz.

Q: What is the architecture difference?

A: The FirePro W4170M is based on GCN 1.0 with the Opal chip, while the R7 M360 uses GCN 3.0 with the Meso chip. Both are on a 28 nm process.

Q: Does the R7 M360 have any benchmark advantage?

A: The R7 M360 has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 5223, but the FirePro W4170M has no corresponding Vulkan score in the data, so no direct comparison is possible.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the AMD FirePro W4170M in the OpenCL benchmark, where it leads by 8.5%. This is a significant margin given that the two cards share the same shading unit, TMU, and ROP counts. The deciding factor is the memory subsystem: the FirePro’s GDDR5 memory with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth is a decisive advantage over the R7 M360’s DDR3 memory with 14.40 GB/s. For any workload that stresses memory bandwidth, the FirePro W4170M is the better choice.

The R7 M360 offers higher clock speeds and a more modern GCN 3.0 architecture, which gives it higher theoretical pixel rate (9.000 GPixel/s) and texture rate (27.00 GTexel/s). It also supports DirectX 12 (12_0), which is a fuller feature level than the FirePro W4170M’s DirectX 12 (11_1). For gaming or applications that leverage these specific features, the R7 M360 may be more suitable, but the OpenCL data shows it falls behind in general compute performance.

Users who need a mobile GPU for professional or compute-oriented tasks, such as OpenCL acceleration, should favor the AMD FirePro W4170M. Its 8.5% benchmark lead and superior memory bandwidth make it the stronger performer in that domain. Users who prioritize the newer GCN 3.0 architecture, higher clock speeds, or Vulkan performance (indicated by the R7 M360’s score of 5223) might find the R7 M360 more appealing, but they must accept the lower OpenCL score and significantly reduced memory bandwidth. Based on the available benchmark results, the FirePro W4170M is the superior overall GPU.