AMD FirePro W4170M vs AMD Radeon RX 560 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records only one directly comparable benchmark between these two mobile and desktop graphics solutions: Geekbench OpenCL. In that test, the AMD Radeon RX 560 delivers a score of 16472, while the AMD FirePro W4170M trails far behind at 5034. This represents a delta of 69.4 percent in favor of the RX 560, meaning the RX 560 achieves more than three times the OpenCL compute score of the older FirePro part. The result is decisive: in raw compute throughput, the newer Polaris-based card completely outclasses the GCN 1.0-era FirePro.

The RX 560's advantage is not merely a matter of clock speed or architecture generation; the recorded numbers reveal a massive gap in shading resources and memory bandwidth. The FirePro W4170M's 384 shading units and 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth are dwarfed by the RX 560's 1024 shading units and 112.0 GB/s. The Geekbench OpenCL workload is heavily parallel, and the RX 560's four-fold increase in shading units, combined with its higher clocks, explains the observed score differential.

Beyond the head-to-head, the database shows the FirePro W4170M sits at the 30th percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 560 sits at the 26th percentile. This is an interesting inversion: despite winning the direct comparison, the RX 560's average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 4569, which is lower than the FirePro's average of 5034. The reason is that the RX 560's average is pulled down by its Passmark DirectX and compute scores, which are recorded on a different scale. The FirePro has only a single OpenCL benchmark entry, so its average equals that score. The percentile figures reflect the entire test suite, not just the head-to-head comparison.

The nearest rivals in the database further contextualize each card's standing. The FirePro W4170M's closest competitor is the AMD Radeon R7 M340, which scores 5063, a delta of 0.6 percent against the FirePro. The FirePro is essentially tied with the R7 M340 and R7 240, and it edges out the Radeon R5 M430 by 0.3 percent and the Radeon R7 Graphics by 0.7 percent. These are marginal differences, indicating that the FirePro W4170M performs at the level of a low-end mobile Radeon from the same era.

The RX 560's nearest rivals tell a different story. Its closest match is the Intel HD Graphics P530, which scores 4560, a delta of 0.2 percent. The RX 560 also sits within 1.3 percent of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M (4628) and within 1.1 percent of the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M (4621). These deltas are small, but they are negative from the RX 560's perspective, meaning the two NVIDIA parts slightly outscore it in the aggregate. The RX 560's average is dragged down by its Passmark DirectX 10 and 11 scores of 16 and 25, which are low on that scale. The FirePro, lacking those entries, does not suffer the same penalty.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the direct OpenCL benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 560 wins decisively. It scores 16472 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 5034 for the AMD FirePro W4170M, a delta of 69.4 percent in favor of the RX 560.

Q: How much faster is the RX 560 in terms of raw compute throughput?

A: The RX 560 delivers 2.611 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the FirePro W4170M delivers 691.2 GFLOPS. This is a 3.78-fold difference, which aligns with the observed OpenCL score gap.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each card?

A: The FirePro W4170M has an average benchmark score of 5034, based on its single Geekbench OpenCL result. The RX 560 has an average of 4569, computed across its nine recorded benchmarks including Passmark tests and Geekbench Metal and OpenCL.

Q: Why does the RX 560 have a lower percentile rank despite winning the head-to-head?

A: The RX 560's percentile of 26 reflects all its recorded benchmarks, including low Passmark DirectX scores on a different scale. The FirePro W4170M's percentile of 30 is based solely on its OpenCL score. The percentile metric is not limited to the single head-to-head test.

Q: How does each card compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The FirePro W4170M is within 0.7 percent of the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics and within 0.6 percent of both the R7 M340 and R7 240. The RX 560 is within 0.2 percent of the Intel HD Graphics P530 and within 1.3 percent of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: The FirePro W4170M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 560 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for compute-intensive workloads: the AMD Radeon RX 560. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 69.4 percent higher than the FirePro W4170M's, and its FP32 throughput of 2.611 TFLOPS versus 691.2 GFLOPS is a categorical advantage. Anyone choosing between these two for OpenCL-based tasks, such as rendering or scientific compute, should select the RX 560 without hesitation.

However, the FirePro W4170M has one redeeming feature in the recorded data: its higher average benchmark score (5034 versus 4569) and its higher percentile rank (30 versus 26). This is an artifact of the test suite composition, but it indicates that the FirePro is not without merit in certain legacy or single-test scenarios. The FirePro's sole OpenCL score places it in the same performance tier as the AMD Radeon R7 M340 and R7 240, which are entry-level parts.

The RX 560, despite its lower average, is surrounded by more capable rivals: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M and Quadro M3000M score within 1.3 percent of its average, and the Intel HD Graphics P530 is nearly identical. This suggests the RX 560 occupies a mid-range niche where it competes with older high-end mobile GPUs and modern integrated graphics. For a user prioritizing compute performance, the RX 560 is the only rational choice. For a user who needs a mobile MXM module with a specific legacy feature set, the FirePro W4170M remains a functional, if dated, option.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification. The FirePro W4170M is built on a 28 nm process at TSMC, while the RX 560 uses a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. Transistor counts differ substantially: 950 million for the FirePro versus 3,000 million for the RX 560. Die sizes are 77 mm² and 123 mm², respectively, yielding transistor densities of 12.3M per mm² and 24.4M per mm².

Clock speeds show the RX 560's advantage: base clock of 1175 MHz versus 825 MHz, and boost clock of 1275 MHz versus 900 MHz. Memory clocks also differ, with the FirePro running at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) and the RX 560 at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective). Memory capacity is 2 GB versus 4 GB, though both use GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. Bandwidth rises from 64.00 GB/s to 112.0 GB/s.

Compute resources are vastly different. The FirePro has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The RX 560 has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Pixel rates are 7.200 GPixel/s versus 20.40 GPixel/s, and texture rates are 21.60 GTexel/s versus 81.60 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 691.2 GFLOPS versus 2.611 TFLOPS. The RX 560 also lists FP16 at 2.611 TFLOPS (1:1), while the FirePro has no recorded FP16 figure.

The RX 560 has a TDP of 75 W and a suggested PSU of 250 W; the FirePro has no TDP recorded. Slot widths are MXM Module for the FirePro and Dual-slot for the RX 560. Power connectors are None for both. The RX 560's length is 170 mm (6.7 inches). Bus interfaces are both PCIe 3.0 x8. Display outputs are Portable Device Dependent for the FirePro and 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a for the RX 560.

Architecture Differences

The FirePro W4170M is based on the Opal chip using GCN 1.0 architecture, belonging to the FirePro Mobile (Wx100M) generation. The RX 560 uses the Polaris 21 chip with GCN 4.0 architecture, part of the Polaris (RX 500) generation. This architectural leap from GCN 1.0 to GCN 4.0 accounts for many of the performance differences, including improved instruction scheduling and memory compression techniques.

The process node shrinks from 28 nm to 14 nm, and the foundry changes from TSMC to GlobalFoundries. The RX 560's transistor count more than triples, from 950 million to 3,000 million, even though the die size only grows from 77 mm² to 123 mm². This reflects the denser 14 nm process.

API support differs. The FirePro supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The RX 560 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The higher DirectX feature level and newer Vulkan version on the RX 560 indicate better support for modern graphics APIs.

Release dates are two years apart: the FirePro launched on April 22, 2015, and the RX 560 on April 17, 2017. The FirePro's predecessor is FirePro Mobility and its successor is Radeon Pro Mobile. The RX 560's predecessor is Arctic Islands and its successor is Vega. Both are marked end-of-life in the database. The RX 560 has a recorded launch MSRP of 99 USD; the FirePro has no MSRP recorded.