AMD FirePro W4190M vs AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data clearly favors the AMD FirePro W4190M over the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2. In the single recorded head-to-head test, Geekbench OpenCL, the FirePro W4190M scores 4505 against 3977 for the HD 6850 X2, a 13.3% advantage. This makes the FirePro the decisive choice for workloads that leverage OpenCL acceleration, despite the HD 6850 X2 having a much larger silicon footprint and higher power envelope.

The FirePro W4190M is the logical pick for anyone needing a modern, efficient mobile solution with current API support. Its GCN 1.0 architecture provides DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170 support, which the older TeraScale 2 based HD 6850 X2 lacks entirely (it offers no Vulkan support and only DirectX 11.2). The HD 6850 X2, with its 254 W TDP, dual-slot cooler, and 2x 8-pin power connectors, is a desktop-only product that belongs in a stationary rig, not a portable system. The FirePro's MXM Module form factor and lack of power connectors make it suitable for laptops.

For users constrained to a desktop environment with a high-wattage power supply, the HD 6850 X2 might still be considered, but the performance data does not justify the trade-off. It is slower in the recorded benchmark, uses an older architecture, and offers fewer modern features. The FirePro W4190M is the superior choice based on the measured data, and its higher percentile ranking (26th vs. 24th) reinforces this conclusion.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD FirePro W4190M scores 4505, which is 13.3% higher than the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2's score of 3977.

Q: Are these two cards from the same architectural generation?

A: No. The FirePro W4190M uses the GCN 1.0 architecture, while the HD 6850 X2 uses the much older TeraScale 2 architecture.

Q: Which GPU supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The FirePro W4190M supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The HD 6850 X2 only supports DirectX 11.2 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.4, with no Vulkan support.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare?

A: Both have 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, but the HD 6850 X2 has a 256-bit bus and 134.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the FirePro W4190M has a 128-bit bus and 64.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The HD 6850 X2 has a significantly higher pixel rate of 25.60 GPixel/s, compared to the FirePro W4190M's 7.200 GPixel/s.

Q: What are the power requirements for the HD 6850 X2?

A: The HD 6850 X2 has a TDP of 254 W, requires a 600 W suggested power supply, and uses 2x 8-pin power connectors. The FirePro W4190M has no listed TDP and uses no power connectors.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is vast. The FirePro W4190M is built on the GCN 1.0 architecture using a 28 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 77 mm² and 950 million transistors. This results in a transistor density of 12.3M / mm². In contrast, the HD 6850 X2 is based on the TeraScale 2 architecture, fabricated on a 40 nm process at TSMC, with a much larger die size of 255 mm² and 1,700 million transistors. Its transistor density is only 6.7M / mm², reflecting the older, less efficient manufacturing process.

The FirePro W4190M features 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. The HD 6850 X2 packs 960 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The HD 6850 X2's raw shader count is 2.5 times higher, but its older architecture and lower efficiency mean it does not translate that advantage into a higher benchmark score.

The FirePro belongs to the FirePro Mobile (Wx100M) generation and uses the Opal chip, while the HD 6850 X2 is part of the Northern Islands (HD 6800) generation using the Barts chip. The FirePro's predecessor is FirePro Mobility and its successor is Radeon Pro Mobile. The HD 6850 X2's predecessor is Evergreen and its successor is Southern Islands. These generational differences are reflected in the API support: the FirePro supports Vulkan 1.2.170 and DirectX 12 (11_1), while the HD 6850 X2 lacks Vulkan entirely and only reaches DirectX 11.2 (11_0).

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every core specification. The FirePro W4190M has a base clock of 825 MHz and a boost clock of 900 MHz, while the HD 6850 X2 has no base or boost clock listed. Memory clocks also differ: the FirePro runs at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective), while the HD 6850 X2 runs at 1050 MHz (4.2 Gbps effective).

The memory bus width is a major differentiator. The FirePro uses a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth, while the HD 6850 X2 uses a 256-bit bus with 134.4 GB/s of bandwidth. Both have 2 GB of GDDR5 memory.

Compute throughput shows the HD 6850 X2's theoretical advantage: it delivers 1.536 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the FirePro delivers 691.2 GFLOPS. The HD 6850 X2 also has higher texture and pixel rates: 38.40 GTexel/s and 25.60 GPixel/s, respectively, versus 21.60 GTexel/s and 7.200 GPixel/s for the FirePro.

Physical and power specifications are starkly different. The FirePro is an MXM Module with no power connectors, while the HD 6850 X2 is a dual-slot card requiring 2x 8-pin power connectors and a 600 W suggested power supply, with a TDP of 254 W. The bus interface also differs: the FirePro uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the HD 6850 X2 uses PCIe 2.0 x16.

Display outputs tell the story of their intended use cases. The FirePro's outputs are "Portable Device Dependent," meaning it relies on the laptop manufacturer's design. The HD 6850 X2 provides 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.3a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.1, making it a standalone desktop card.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only recorded head-to-head benchmark is Geekbench OpenCL. In this test, the FirePro W4190M scores 4505, while the HD 6850 X2 scores 3977. The FirePro wins by a delta of 13.3%. This is a substantial margin, especially considering the HD 6850 X2's theoretical compute advantage of more than double the FP32 throughput.

The FirePro's victory is notable because the HD 6850 X2 has 960 shading units versus 384, a 256-bit memory bus versus 128-bit, and a much higher pixel rate. The fact that the FirePro still wins by 13.3% indicates that the GCN 1.0 architecture is significantly more efficient at executing OpenCL workloads than the older TeraScale 2 design. The HD 6850 X2's raw numbers do not translate into real-world performance in this test.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each GPU provides additional context. The FirePro's closest competitors include the AMD Radeon R7 M260 (avg score 4499, delta 0.1%), Intel HD Graphics P530 (avg score 4560, delta -1.2%), AMD Radeon RX 560 (avg score 4569, delta -1.4%), and AMD Radeon R5 M230 (avg score 4577, delta -1.6%). This places the FirePro in a competitive mid-range mobile segment. The HD 6850 X2's rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 (avg score 3964, delta 0.3%), NVIDIA GeForce 830M (avg score 3957, delta 0.5%), AMD Radeon R5 M420 (avg score 3956, delta 0.5%), and NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M (avg score 3953, delta 0.6%). The HD 6850 X2 sits in a lower performance tier, close to older or entry-level mobile parts.

The wins tally is equally clear: the FirePro W4190M has 1 win in the head-to-head benchmarks, while the HD 6850 X2 has 0. The FirePro also holds a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs (26th) compared to the HD 6850 X2 (24th). This further confirms that the FirePro is the stronger performer in the recorded data.

Where Each One Wins

The FirePro W4190M wins in the most important category for modern GPU workloads: OpenCL compute performance. Its 4505 Geekbench score is 13.3% higher than the HD 6850 X2's 3977. This makes it the better choice for any application that relies on OpenCL acceleration, including video encoding, image processing, and general-purpose GPU computing.

The FirePro also wins decisively in software compatibility and API modernity. It supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the HD 6850 X2 is limited to DirectX 11.2 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.4. For users running modern games or applications that require Vulkan or DirectX 12 features, the HD 6850 X2 is simply not an option. The FirePro's PCIe 3.0 x8 interface also offers a newer bus standard compared to the HD 6850 X2's PCIe 2.0 x16.

The HD 6850 X2 retains wins in raw throughput metrics. Its memory bandwidth of 134.4 GB/s is more than double the FirePro's 64.00 GB/s. Its pixel rate of 25.60 GPixel/s is over 3.5 times higher, and its texture rate of 38.40 GTexel/s is 1.8 times higher. Its FP32 compute of 1.536 TFLOPS is more than double the FirePro's 691.2 GFLOPS. In purely theoretical terms, the HD 6850 X2 has the hardware muscle to excel in fill-rate-bound or bandwidth-bound scenarios, such as high-resolution texture streaming or compute tasks that are not well-optimized for the FirePro's architecture. However, the actual benchmark data shows that this theoretical advantage does not materialize in OpenCL performance.

For a user building a desktop with a high-wattage power supply (600 W or more) and needing multiple legacy display outputs (DVI, HDMI 1.3a, DisplayPort 1.1), the HD 6850 X2 has a role. Its dual-slot cooler and 2x 8-pin power connectors are manageable in a full tower. But for anyone prioritizing measured performance, modern API support, or mobile deployment, the FirePro W4190M is the clear winner from the data. The HD 6850 X2's size, power draw, and older feature set make it a niche product, while the FirePro offers a more balanced and future-proof solution.