AMD FirePro W4170M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M Comparison

The AMD FirePro W4170M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions, but they belong to very different eras of GPU design. The FirePro W4170M is built on GCN 1.0 architecture using a 28 nm process, while the GTX 460M uses the Fermi architecture on a 40 nm process. The recorded benchmark data for these two mobile modules shows a clear performance gap, but the underlying architectural and specification differences explain why the newer AMD part holds the edge.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a single direct comparison between these two GPUs: the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this measurement, the AMD FirePro W4170M scores 5034 points, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M scores 4282 points. This gives the AMD part a 17.6% advantage over the NVIDIA part. The margin is substantial, placing the FirePro W4170M clearly ahead in raw compute performance as measured by this workload.

The FirePro W4170M’s score also positions it better within the broader database. It sits at the 30th percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 460M sits at the 25th percentile. That five-point percentile gap reinforces the head-to-head result: the AMD part is not merely faster than this one rival, it also ranks higher across the entire field of recorded GPUs.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each card provides additional context. The FirePro W4170M is closely matched with several AMD integrated and discrete parts. Its score of 5034 is just 0.3% above the AMD Radeon R5 M430’s 5018 points, and 0.7% above the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics’ 4998 points. It trails the AMD Radeon R7 M340 and AMD Radeon R7 240, both of which score 5063 points, by 0.6%. These are tight margins, showing that the FirePro W4170M lands in a crowded performance band where small differences separate competitors.

The GTX 460M’s nearest rivals tell a similar story, but at a lower performance level. Its 4282 points are 0.3% above the AMD Radeon Vega 3’s 4268 points, and 1% above the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M’s 4241 points. It trails the AMD FirePro W2100, which scores 4295 points, by 0.3%, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6, which scores 4335 points, by 1.2%. The presence of a modern GeForce RTX card in that list is notable, but the delta is small, indicating that the GTX 460M’s OpenCL result is not far off from much newer hardware in this specific test.

The data shows a single decisive win for the AMD FirePro W4170M, with no benchmark victories recorded for the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M. The 17.6% delta in Geekbench OpenCL is the only direct comparison available, but it is consistent with the percentile rankings and the average benchmark scores of both cards.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the AMD FirePro W4170M is the faster GPU. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark in the database, and it holds a higher percentile ranking across all GPUs. Anyone choosing between these two for a workload that depends on OpenCL compute performance should favor the AMD part.

The GTX 460M is not without merit, but its strengths do not show up in the available measurements. Its 24 ROPs and 32 texture mapping units are higher than the FirePro W4170M’s 8 ROPs and 24 TMUs, which could matter for certain pixel-heavy or texture-heavy tasks. However, the actual benchmark result favors the AMD card by a wide margin, so those specification advantages do not translate into a higher OpenCL score.

The FirePro W4170M also has the advantage of a more modern feature set. Its Vulkan support is listed at version 1.2.170, while the GTX 460M has no Vulkan support recorded. DirectX support is similar, with the AMD card at 12 (11_1) and the NVIDIA card at 12 (11_0), but the Vulkan gap is significant for any modern application that can use it.

The GTX 460M does have one clear advantage in the data: its 50 W TDP is explicitly recorded, while the FirePro W4170M’s TDP is missing from the database. That means the NVIDIA part has a known power envelope, which can be useful for system designers. However, the absence of a TDP figure for the AMD card does not indicate that it is less efficient; it simply means no such number is recorded.

For raw compute performance, the verdict is unambiguous. The AMD FirePro W4170M leads the GTX 460M by 17.6% in the only direct benchmark, and it ranks higher in the overall distribution. The NVIDIA card’s specification strengths do not overcome this measured deficit.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro W4170M wins in OpenCL compute performance. Its 5034 Geekbench OpenCL score beats the GTX 460M’s 4282 by 17.6%, and its 691.2 GFLOPS FP32 throughput is higher than the NVIDIA card’s 518.4 GFLOPS. The AMD part also has more shading units, with 384 compared to 192, which helps explain its compute advantage.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M wins in several specification categories. It has a wider memory bus at 192 bit compared to 128 bit, and more texture mapping units at 32 versus 24. Its ROP count of 24 is three times the FirePro W4170M’s 8, which suggests a potential advantage in fill-rate-bound scenarios. The GTX 460M’s pixel rate is 5.400 GPixel/s, while the AMD card achieves 7.200 GPixel/s, so the AMD part is actually faster on that front despite having fewer ROPs. The texture rates are identical at 21.60 GTexel/s for both cards.

The GTX 460M also has a larger physical die at 238 mm² with 1,170 million transistors, compared to the FirePro W4170M’s 77 mm² die with 950 million transistors. The AMD card is built on a 28 nm process from TSMC, while the NVIDIA card uses a 40 nm process from the same foundry. This explains the density difference: the AMD part packs 12.3 million transistors per square millimeter, while the NVIDIA part manages only 4.9 million.

Memory bandwidth is close but favors the AMD card. The FirePro W4170M delivers 64.00 GB/s over a 128 bit bus, while the GTX 460M delivers 60.00 GB/s over a 192 bit bus. The AMD card achieves this with 1000 MHz memory clock and 4 Gbps effective speed, while the NVIDIA card uses a 625 MHz memory clock with 2.5 Gbps effective speed. The AMD card’s 2 GB GDDR5 capacity exceeds the NVIDIA card’s 1536 MB.

In terms of bus interface, the two cards differ. The FirePro W4170M uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the GTX 460M uses PCIe 2.0 x16. Both are MXM modules with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs. The AMD card supports Vulkan 1.2.170, while the NVIDIA card has no Vulkan support listed.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD FirePro W4170M scores 5034 points, which is 17.6% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M’s 4282 points.

Q: How do these GPUs compare in memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD FirePro W4170M provides 64.00 GB/s over a 128 bit bus, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M provides 60.00 GB/s over a 192 bit bus.

Q: What is the transistor count for each chip?

A: The AMD FirePro W4170M uses the Opal chip with 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M uses the GF106 chip with 1,170 million transistors on a 238 mm² die.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The AMD FirePro W4170M has 384 shading units, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M has 192 shading units.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: No. The AMD FirePro W4170M supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support recorded.

Q: What are the production statuses of these cards?

A: Both are listed as end-of-life. The AMD FirePro W4170M was released on 2015-04-22, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M was released on 2010-09-02.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent fundamentally different architectures from two different generations. The AMD FirePro W4170M is built on GCN 1.0, which is the first iteration of AMD’s Graphics Core Next design. Its chip is codenamed Opal. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M uses the Fermi architecture, with the GF106 chip. Fermi was NVIDIA’s architecture for the GeForce 400M generation, while GCN 1.0 powered AMD’s FirePro Mobile (Wx100M) generation.

The manufacturing process separates these two parts clearly. The AMD card uses a 28 nm process from TSMC, while the NVIDIA card uses a 40 nm process, also from TSMC. This process difference contributes to the massive die size gap: the NVIDIA chip is 238 mm², while the AMD chip is only 77 mm². Despite the smaller die, the AMD chip contains 950 million transistors, while the NVIDIA chip contains 1,170 million. The resulting transistor density is 12.3 million per square millimeter for AMD versus 4.9 million for NVIDIA.

Compute resources differ significantly. The AMD card has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. The NVIDIA card has 192 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 24 ROPs. The shader count heavily favors AMD, while the TMU and ROP counts favor NVIDIA. FP32 throughput is 691.2 GFLOPS for AMD and 518.4 GFLOPS for NVIDIA, giving AMD a 33% advantage in raw floating-point compute.

Memory architecture also differs. The AMD card uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128 bit bus, while the NVIDIA card uses 1536 MB of GDDR5 on a 192 bit bus. The effective memory speeds are 4 Gbps for AMD and 2.5 Gbps for NVIDIA. This combination yields 64.00 GB/s for AMD and 60.00 GB/s for NVIDIA.

Feature support diverges on Vulkan. The AMD card lists Vulkan 1.2.170, while the NVIDIA card has no Vulkan support. DirectX support is nearly identical, with AMD at 12 (11_1) and NVIDIA at 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6.

The bus interface differs as well. The AMD FirePro W4170M uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the GTX 460M uses PCIe 2.0 x16. Both are MXM modules with no power connectors, and both have portable-device-dependent display outputs.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show several clear differences between the AMD FirePro W4170M and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M.

Architecture and process: AMD uses GCN 1.0 on a 28 nm TSMC process; NVIDIA uses Fermi on a 40 nm TSMC process.

Chip and die: AMD’s Opal chip is 77 mm² with 950 million transistors; NVIDIA’s GF106 chip is 238 mm² with 1,170 million transistors. Transistor density is 12.3M per mm² for AMD and 4.9M per mm² for NVIDIA.

Clock speeds: The AMD card has a base clock of 825 MHz and a boost clock of 900 MHz. The NVIDIA card has no base or boost clock recorded. Memory clocks are 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) for AMD and 625 MHz (2.5 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA.

Memory: AMD has 2 GB GDDR5 on a 128 bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. NVIDIA has 1536 MB GDDR5 on a 192 bit bus with 60.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute units: AMD has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. NVIDIA has 192 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 24 ROPs.

Performance rates: AMD achieves 7.200 GPixel/s pixel rate and 21.60 GTexel/s texture rate. NVIDIA achieves 5.400 GPixel/s pixel rate and 21.60 GTexel/s texture rate. FP32 is 691.2 GFLOPS for AMD and 518.4 GFLOPS for NVIDIA.

Power and form factor: NVIDIA lists a TDP of 50 W; AMD has no TDP recorded. Both use MXM modules with no power connectors.

Bus interface: AMD uses PCIe 3.0 x8; NVIDIA uses PCIe 2.0 x16.

API support: AMD lists DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. NVIDIA lists DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, with no Vulkan support.

Release dates: AMD was released on 2015-04-22; NVIDIA was released on 2010-09-02. Both are end-of-life. AMD’s series predecessor is FirePro Mobility and successor is Radeon Pro Mobile; NVIDIA’s predecessor is GeForce 300M and successor is GeForce 500M.