AMD FirePro W4190M vs AMD Radeon R5 M330 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly in favor of the AMD FirePro W4190M, which takes the only head-to-head test available. In Geekbench OpenCL, the FirePro W4190M scores 4505 against the Radeon R5 M330’s 4302, a 4.7% margin. That is not a dominant victory, but it is consistent with their placement in the broader GPU landscape. The FirePro sits at the 26th percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon R5 M330 sits just one point lower at the 25th percentile. For practical purposes, these are adjacent performance tiers, and the FirePro’s edge is real but modest.

The Radeon R5 M330 does have one unique data point: a Geekbench Vulkan score of 4037. The FirePro W4190M has no Vulkan benchmark result in the pack, so the R5 M330 wins on API coverage by default. That matters for workloads that leverage Vulkan compute, but it is not a performance comparison — it is simply a test the FirePro did not run.

Interpreting the wins differently: the FirePro W4190M is the pick for OpenCL compute throughput, where its 4.7% advantage over the R5 M330 mirrors its slight edge over the AMD Radeon R7 M260 (0.1% ahead) and its 1.4% lead over the AMD Radeon RX 560. The R5 M330, meanwhile, trails those same rivals by larger margins — it is 1.7% behind the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M and 1.9% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB, a strange pairing that underscores its mid-pack status. Neither GPU is a performance leader; both are entry-level mobile parts with distinct trade-offs.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on AMD’s GCN 1.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC’s 28 nm process, and both come from the same transistor density of 12.3M per mm². That is where the similarities end. The FirePro W4190M uses the Opal chip, which packs 950 million transistors into a 77 mm² die. The Radeon R5 M330 uses the smaller Exo chip, with 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die. The FirePro’s larger silicon translates directly into more compute resources: 384 shading units versus 320, 24 texture mapping units versus 20, and an identical 8 ROPs on both.

Memory architecture diverges sharply. The FirePro W4190M pairs its 2 GB frame buffer with GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon R5 M330 also has 2 GB, but it uses DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, capping bandwidth at 14.40 GB/s. That is a 4.4x difference in memory throughput, which is far larger than the compute gap and likely explains why the FirePro wins OpenCL despite the R5 M330’s higher clocks.

Clock speeds favor the Radeon R5 M330. Its base clock is 955 MHz with a 1030 MHz boost, compared to the FirePro’s 825 MHz base and 900 MHz boost. The R5 M330 also runs its memory at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), while the FirePro’s memory runs at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective). The higher memory clock on the FirePro, combined with the wider bus, creates the bandwidth chasm.

Power and form factor differ as well. The Radeon R5 M330 is rated at 18 W TDP and uses an IGP slot width, meaning it is designed to be integrated into a laptop board. The FirePro W4190M has no listed TDP but uses an MXM Module slot, a removable mobile graphics standard. Both use PCIe 3.0 x8 and have no power connectors. The FirePro is part of the FirePro Mobile (Wx100M) generation, while the R5 M330 belongs to the Gem System (R5 M300) line. The FirePro’s predecessor is FirePro Mobility and its successor is Radeon Pro Mobile; the R5 M330’s predecessor is Solar System and its successor is Polaris Mobile.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL?

A: The AMD FirePro W4190M scores 4505 in Geekbench OpenCL, beating the AMD Radeon R5 M330’s 4302 by 4.7%.

Q: Does the Radeon R5 M330 support Vulkan?

A: Yes, the R5 M330 has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 4037. The FirePro W4190M has no Vulkan benchmark result in the data, so its Vulkan performance is unmeasured.

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The FirePro W4190M has 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth from its GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus. The Radeon R5 M330 has 14.40 GB/s from DDR3 on a 64-bit bus — a 4.4x difference.

Q: Are both GPUs the same architecture?

A: Yes, both use GCN 1.0 on TSMC’s 28 nm process. However, they use different chips: the FirePro uses Opal (950 million transistors, 77 mm²), and the R5 M330 uses Exo (690 million transistors, 56 mm²).

Q: Which GPU has higher clock speeds?

A: The Radeon R5 M330 runs at 955 MHz base and 1030 MHz boost, versus the FirePro’s 825 MHz base and 900 MHz boost. Despite this, the FirePro wins OpenCL due to its wider memory bus and faster memory type.

Q: How do these GPUs compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The FirePro W4190M is 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 M260 and 1.4% behind the AMD Radeon RX 560. The R5 M330 is 0.4% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M and 1.9% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD FirePro W4190M | AMD Radeon R5 M330 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | Opal | Exo |

| Generation | FirePro Mobile (Wx100M) | Gem System (R5 M300) |

| Transistors | 950 million | 690 million |

| Die Size | 77 mm² | 56 mm² |

| Base Clock | 825 MHz | 955 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 900 MHz | 1030 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) | 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 64.00 GB/s | 14.40 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 384 | 320 |

| Texture Mapping Units | 24 | 20 |

| Pixel Rate | 7.200 GPixel/s | 8.240 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 21.60 GTexel/s | 20.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 691.2 GFLOPS | 659.2 GFLOPS |

| TDP | Not listed | 18 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | IGP |

| Release Date | 2015-11-11 | 2015-05-04 |

| Predecessor | FirePro Mobility | Solar System |

| Successor | Radeon Pro Mobile | Polaris Mobile |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL, and it goes to the AMD FirePro W4190M by a score of 4505 to 4302. That 4.7% delta is the entire story of this head-to-head. The FirePro’s advantage comes despite a 130 MHz lower base clock and a 130 MHz lower boost clock than the R5 M330. Clock speed alone does not decide this matchup.

The decisive factor is memory. The FirePro’s GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus delivers 64.00 GB/s, while the R5 M330’s DDR3 on a 64-bit bus manages only 14.40 GB/s. That 49.60 GB/s gap is more than three times the R5 M330’s total bandwidth. OpenCL workloads often scale with memory throughput, and this is a textbook example. The FirePro also has more compute hardware — 384 shading units versus 320, and 24 TMUs versus 20 — which compounds the memory advantage. Its FP32 output of 691.2 GFLOPS edges out the R5 M330’s 659.2 GFLOPS, a 4.9% difference that tracks closely with the 4.7% benchmark delta.

The R5 M330 does win on pixel rate, posting 8.240 GPixel/s against the FirePro’s 7.200 GPixel/s, thanks to its higher clocks and identical 8 ROPs. But pixel rate is a rasterization metric, and neither GPU shows a DirectX or OpenGL benchmark result in the data to test that advantage. The R5 M330’s 20.60 GTexel/s texture rate trails the FirePro’s 21.60 GTexel/s, so the only rate metric it wins is pixels.

In the broader context, the FirePro’s 4505 OpenCL score places it 0.1% above the AMD Radeon R7 M260 (4499) and 1.2% below the Intel HD Graphics P530 (4560). The R5 M330’s 4302 score puts it 0.4% above the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M (4151) and 0.5% below the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (4193). The R5 M330’s average benchmark score across both tests is 4170, which is below its OpenCL result because the Vulkan score of 4037 drags the average down. The FirePro’s average is 4505, equal to its sole benchmark.

The verdict is straightforward: the FirePro W4190M is the faster GPU in compute workloads, and its memory subsystem is the reason. The R5 M330’s higher clocks and lower power draw (18 W TDP versus no listed TDP) make it a different class of part — an integrated solution rather than an MXM module — but the performance data favors the FirePro. The R5 M330’s Vulkan support is a genuine differentiator, but without a Vulkan result for the FirePro, that remains an unquantified advantage. For anyone choosing between these two based on the available numbers, the FirePro W4190M wins the only race that was run.