AMD FirePro W4190M vs AMD Radeon R5 M430 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly between these two mobile graphics parts. The AMD Radeon R5 M430 wins the only head-to-head test recorded in the database, the Geekbench OpenCL compute benchmark, scoring 5152 against the FirePro W4190M's 4505. That is a 14.4% advantage, a meaningful margin in raw compute throughput. The R5 M430 also has a second recorded score, a Geekbench Vulkan result of 4884, which gives it a broader performance profile. The FirePro W4190M has no Vulkan score listed, so its competitive picture rests entirely on that single OpenCL measurement.

The use-case split is not about different strengths, it is about consistency. The Radeon R5 M430 posts two benchmark scores with an average of 5018, while the FirePro W4190M averages 4505 across its single test. The R5 M430 sits at the 30th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the FirePro sits at the 26th percentile. Neither part is positioned as a high-end performer, but the R5 M430 is reliably ahead in every measured scenario. For tasks that rely on OpenCL compute, the R5 M430 is the clear pick. For Vulkan workloads, only the R5 M430 has any recorded data at all, making it the only option with a measurable result in that API.

The nearest-rival comparisons reinforce this. The R5 M430's average score of 5018 places it within 0.3% of the AMD FirePro W4170M (5034), 0.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics (4998), and 0.8% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 (4979). It trails the AMD Radeon R7 M340 (5063) by 0.9%. The FirePro W4190M, meanwhile, sits within 0.1% of the AMD Radeon R7 M260 (4499), 1.2% behind the Intel HD Graphics P530 (4560), 1.4% behind the AMD Radeon RX 560 (4569), and 1.6% behind the AMD Radeon R5 M230 (4577). The R5 M430 is effectively competing with a slightly faster tier of parts, while the FirePro is clustered with a slightly slower one.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the same GCN 1.0 architecture and are fabricated on the same 28 nm process at TSMC, with an identical transistor density of 12.3 million transistors per square millimeter. The similarities end there. The Radeon R5 M430 uses the Jet chip, which packs 690 million transistors into a 56 mm² die. The FirePro W4190M uses the Opal chip, a larger 77 mm² die with 950 million transistors. That is a 260 million transistor difference and a 21 mm² die size gap, both favoring the FirePro in terms of raw silicon resources.

The compute configuration follows the die size. The FirePro W4190M has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 raster operation units. The Radeon R5 M430 has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and the same 8 ROPs. The FirePro has 64 more shading units and 4 more TMUs, a 20% advantage in both counts. The ROP count is identical, so pixel throughput is limited by clock speeds rather than unit counts. The FirePro also clocks higher: 825 MHz base and 900 MHz boost versus 780 MHz base and 855 MHz boost for the R5 M430. Both the unit advantage and the clock advantage favor the FirePro, yet the benchmark results show the opposite outcome.

Memory is where the two diverge most sharply. The Radeon R5 M430 has 4 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 16.00 GB/s of bandwidth at 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective). The FirePro W4190M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 64.00 GB/s at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective). The FirePro has four times the memory bandwidth, which should be a decisive advantage in memory-intensive workloads. The R5 M430 counters with twice the capacity, which matters for large datasets that exceed 2 GB. The FirePro's memory configuration is clearly superior for bandwidth, but the R5 M430's larger pool may be the practical factor in some compute tasks.

The two parts also share the same API support: DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both use PCIe 3.0 x8 and both are marked as end-of-life. The R5 M430 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP), while the FirePro W4190M is an MXM module. The R5 M430 lists its predecessor as Solar System and successor as Polaris Mobile; the FirePro lists FirePro Mobility and Radeon Pro Mobile respectively. The FirePro has a recorded release date of November 11, 2015; the R5 M430 has no release date in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test. The Radeon R5 M430 scores 5152, the FirePro W4190M scores 4505. The delta is 14.4% in favor of the R5 M430. This is a substantial gap given that the FirePro has more shading units, more TMUs, higher clocks, and four times the memory bandwidth. The data suggests that raw hardware resources do not translate directly into compute performance in this case.

The R5 M430's Vulkan score of 4884 is its second-best recorded result, though there is no FirePro Vulkan score to compare. The R5 M430's OpenCL score is 268 points higher than its Vulkan score, a 5.5% difference within the same GPU. That internal comparison shows the R5 M430 is slightly stronger in OpenCL than Vulkan, though both scores are in the same performance envelope.

Looking at the average benchmark scores, the R5 M430 at 5018 is 11.4% ahead of the FirePro's 4505. The R5 M430's nearest rivals on average score are all within a 1% band: the W4170M at 5034, the R7 M340 at 5063, the R7 Graphics at 4998, and the Quadro 4000 at 4979. The FirePro's nearest rivals are similarly clustered: the R7 M260 at 4499, the HD Graphics P530 at 4560, the RX 560 at 4569, and the R5 M230 at 4577. The two GPUs are not just separated from each other, they occupy different performance tiers relative to their respective peer groups.

The percentile data confirms the positioning. The R5 M430 is at the 30th percentile of all GPUs, the FirePro at the 26th. A four-percentile gap is modest but consistent with the 14.4% benchmark delta. The FirePro's higher hardware specifications do not produce higher percentile placement, which is a notable finding for anyone comparing these two on paper.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD Radeon R5 M430 as the stronger performer in direct comparison. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark by 14.4%, has a higher average benchmark score (5018 versus 4505), and holds a higher percentile ranking (30th versus 26th). It also has a Vulkan result where the FirePro has none, giving it a wider measured capability profile. For any workload that shows up in the database, the R5 M430 is the one to choose.

The FirePro W4190M is not without arguments in its favor, but those arguments come from the specification sheet, not the benchmark data. It has more shading units, more TMUs, higher clocks, and four times the memory bandwidth. The die is larger and more complex, with 950 million transistors versus 690 million. If the decision were based solely on paper specifications, the FirePro would appear to be the faster part. The recorded measurements say otherwise. The R5 M430's 14.4% lead in OpenCL compute is a direct contradiction of the hardware hierarchy.

The memory capacity is the one practical advantage for the R5 M430. Its 4 GB frame buffer is double the FirePro's 2 GB. For tasks that require holding larger working sets in local memory, the R5 M430 has a clear edge. The FirePro's 64.00 GB/s bandwidth is four times the R5 M430's 16.00 GB/s, but that bandwidth advantage does not show up as a compute advantage in the recorded data. The R5 M430 is the recommended pick for general compute workloads, OpenCL tasks, and any Vulkan-based application. The FirePro is only preferable if the specific workload demands its higher bandwidth and the 2 GB capacity is sufficient, but no benchmark data supports that preference.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M430 scores 5152 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD FirePro W4190M scores 4505, a 14.4% difference in favor of the R5 M430.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD FirePro W4190M has 384 shading units, compared to 320 for the AMD Radeon R5 M430.

Q: How does memory bandwidth compare?

A: The FirePro W4190M has 64.00 GB/s from 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, while the R5 M430 has 16.00 GB/s from 4 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus.

Q: Is there a Vulkan benchmark score for the FirePro?

A: No, the database only records a Geekbench OpenCL score of 4505 for the FirePro W4190M. The R5 M430 has both OpenCL (5152) and Vulkan (4884) scores.

Q: Which GPU has a higher percentile ranking?

A: The R5 M430 is at the 30th percentile of all GPUs, while the FirePro W4190M is at the 26th percentile.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in chip design, memory configuration, clock speeds, and form factor. The Radeon R5 M430 uses the Jet chip with 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die. The FirePro W4190M uses the Opal chip with 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die. Both are 28 nm TSMC parts with 12.3M transistors per mm² density.

The FirePro has higher clocks: 825 MHz base and 900 MHz boost versus 780 MHz base and 855 MHz boost for the R5 M430. The FirePro also has more compute units: 384 shading units and 24 TMUs versus 320 shading units and 20 TMUs. Both have 8 ROPs. The pixel rate is 7.200 GPixel/s for the FirePro and 6.840 GPixel/s for the R5 M430. The texture rate is 21.60 GTexel/s versus 17.10 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 691.2 GFLOPS for the FirePro and 547.2 GFLOPS for the R5 M430.

Memory differs completely. The R5 M430 has 4 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 16.00 GB/s bandwidth at 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective). The FirePro has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective). The R5 M430 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP), while the FirePro is an MXM module with no power connectors. Both use PCIe 3.0 x8. The FirePro has a release date of November 11, 2015; the R5 M430 has no recorded release date. Both are end-of-life products with the same API support and both are listed as portable device dependent for display outputs.