AMD FirePro W4190M vs AMD Radeon RX 560 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data presents a single direct comparison between the AMD Radeon RX 560 and the AMD FirePro W4190M: the Geekbench OpenCL test. The results are decisive. The RX 560 scores 16,472, while the W4190M manages only 4,505. This translates to a 265.6% advantage for the RX 560. That is not a marginal lead; it is a generational chasm. The RX 560 delivers nearly four times the compute performance in this particular workload.

Context from the nearest rivals clarifies the meaning of these scores. The RX 560's average benchmark score of 4,569 places it in the 26th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest competitor, the AMD Radeon R5 M230, scores 4,577, a delta of only -0.2%. The Intel HD Graphics P530 trails by a razor-thin 0.2%, scoring 4,560. Even the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M (4,621) and GeForce GTX 970M (4,628) are within a 1.3% margin. In other words, the RX 560 sits in a crowded cluster where tiny score differences separate rivals.

The W4190M, meanwhile, also occupies the 26th percentile, but its average score of 4,505 is anchored differently. Its nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R7 M260 at 4,499, a delta of just 0.1%. The Intel HD Graphics P530 is 1.2% ahead. Crucially, the W4190M's nearestRivals list includes the RX 560 itself, with a deltaPct of -1.4%. That means, based on average scores alone, the two cards are nearly inseparable. The average scores (4,569 vs. 4,505) differ by only 1.4%. Yet the Geekbench OpenCL head-to-head shows a 265.6% spread. This is the central paradox of this comparison.

Why does the single OpenCL benchmark diverge so wildly from the average-score proximity? The answer lies in the nature of the tests. The average benchmark score aggregates multiple workloads—PassMark DirectX 9, 10, 11, 12, G2D, G3D, and GPU compute—alongside Geekbench. The RX 560 has nine recorded benchmarks; the W4190M has only one. The W4190M's average is derived from a single OpenCL result, which may not reflect its performance across other API workloads. The RX 560's average pulls in its weaker PassMark scores (e.g., 16 in DirectX 10, 25 in DirectX 11), dragging its average down toward the W4190M's lone data point.

The RX 560's individual benchmark scores reveal its strengths and weaknesses. Its PassMark G3D score is 3,671, and its GPU compute score is 1,437. Its Geekbench Metal score is 18,941, notably higher than its OpenCL score. The W4190M has no Metal score recorded, and its only OpenCL result is 4,505. In every metric where both have data, the RX 560 wins. The winsA count is 1, winsB is 0. But the scarcity of W4190M benchmarks means the head-to-head table is thin. One test, one winner, and a massive delta.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion for compute-heavy workloads: the AMD Radeon RX 560 is the superior part. Its 265.6% lead in Geekbench OpenCL is the only direct comparison available, and it is not close. For anyone considering these two for OpenCL-accelerated tasks, the RX 560 is the obvious choice. The W4190M's single benchmark score of 4,505 suggests it cannot keep pace in raw compute throughput.

However, the average benchmark scores complicate the narrative. Both cards sit at the 26th percentile of all GPUs. Their average scores—4,569 for the RX 560, 4,505 for the W4190M—are nearly identical. This implies that in a broader set of workloads, including DirectX and 2D/3D graphics, the two cards may perform comparably. The RX 560's PassMark DirectX scores are modest (16 in DX10, 25 in DX11, 21 in DX12, 57 in DX9), and its G2D score is 485. The W4190M has no such data, so we cannot confirm parity in those areas. The data is silent on the W4190M's DirectX behavior.

Who should pick which? Based strictly on the available data, the RX 560 wins for OpenCL compute. The W4190M has no recorded wins anywhere. But the W4190M's lack of benchmarks means it is not definitively worse in every scenario—it is simply unmeasured. A cautious analyst would say: if your workload matches the only test on record, the RX 560 is the pick. If your workload is unknown, the data does not support a confident verdict for either card beyond the 26th percentile placement.

The RX 560 also offers a higher average score (4,569 vs. 4,505), a 1.4% edge. That is small but consistent with its OpenCL dominance. The verdict is not unanimous across all hypothetical workloads, but it is unanimous where data exists. The RX 560 is the benchmark champion. The W4190M is a niche mobile part that appears to be outclassed in the one arena where they meet.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 560 scores 16,472, while the AMD FirePro W4190M scores 4,505. The RX 560 leads by 265.6%.

Q: How do the two cards compare in average benchmark scores?

A: The RX 560 has an average benchmark score of 4,569, and the W4190M has an average of 4,505. The RX 560 is ahead by 1.4%.

Q: What percentile do both cards occupy among all GPUs?

A: Both the AMD Radeon RX 560 and the AMD FirePro W4190M are in the 26th percentile of all GPUs.

Q: Does the W4190M have any benchmark wins over the RX 560?

A: No. In the only head-to-head benchmark (Geekbench OpenCL), the RX 560 wins. The winsA count is 1, and winsB is 0.

Q: What is the closest rival to the RX 560 based on average score?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M230 is the closest, with an average score of 4,577, a delta of -0.2% relative to the RX 560's 4,569.

Q: What is the closest rival to the W4190M based on average score?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M260 is the closest, with an average score of 4,499, a delta of 0.1% relative to the W4190M's 4,505.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every core specification. The RX 560 uses a Polaris 21 chip on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, with 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. The W4190M uses an Opal chip on a 28 nm process from TSMC, with 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die. Transistor density is 24.4M per mm² for the RX 560 versus 12.3M per mm² for the W4190M.

Clock speeds diverge sharply. The RX 560 has a base clock of 1175 MHz and a boost clock of 1275 MHz. The W4190M runs at 825 MHz base and 900 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ: the RX 560 runs at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective), while the W4190M runs at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective). Memory capacity is 4 GB for the RX 560 versus 2 GB for the W4190M, both GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. Bandwidth is 112.0 GB/s for the RX 560 and 64.00 GB/s for the W4190M.

Compute units scale accordingly. The RX 560 has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The W4190M has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Pixel rate is 20.40 GPixel/s versus 7.200 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 81.60 GTexel/s versus 21.60 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 2.611 TFLOPS for the RX 560 versus 691.2 GFLOPS for the W4190M. The RX 560 also supports FP16 at 2.611 TFLOPS (1:1), while the W4190M has no FP16 data.

The RX 560 has a TDP of 75 W and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The W4190M has no TDP or PSU data. The RX 560 is a dual-slot card with a 170 mm length; the W4190M is an MXM Module. Display outputs differ: the RX 560 offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the W4190M is "Portable Device Dependent." The RX 560's launch MSRP is 99 USD; the W4190M has no launch MSRP listed.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is generations wide. The RX 560 is built on GCN 4.0, part of the Polaris (RX 500) generation. The W4190M is built on GCN 1.0, from the FirePro Mobile (Wx100M) generation. The RX 560's process node is 14 nm GlobalFoundries; the W4190M's is 28 nm TSMC. That process shrink enables the RX 560 to pack 3,000 million transistors versus 950 million, despite a die size of 123 mm² versus 77 mm².

The RX 560 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The W4190M supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The DirectX feature level difference is notable: 12_0 versus 11_1. The RX 560's FP16 capability (1:1 ratio) is an architectural feature absent from the W4190M's spec sheet. The W4190M's predecessor is FirePro Mobility, while the RX 560's predecessor is Arctic Islands. The RX 560's successor is Vega; the W4190M's successor is Radeon Pro Mobile.

The RX 560's memory bandwidth advantage (112.0 GB/s vs. 64.00 GB/s) stems from its higher memory clock, not a wider bus—both use 128-bit interfaces. The shading unit count (1,024 vs. 384) and TMU count (64 vs. 24) reflect a 2.67x and 2.67x difference, respectively. The ROP count difference is 2x (16 vs. 8). The W4190M's 28 nm process limits its clock ceiling, contributing to its lower pixel and texture rates.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the benchmark data, the AMD Radeon RX 560 wins in the only direct comparison available: Geekbench OpenCL. Its score of 16,472 dwarfs the W4190M's 4,505. For any task that relies on OpenCL compute—GPGPU workloads, certain rendering pipelines, or scientific simulations—the RX 560 is the clear winner. Its higher FP32 throughput (2.611 TFLOPS vs. 691.2 GFLOPS) and 4 GB memory capacity give it a structural advantage.

The RX 560 also wins on average benchmark score (4,569 vs. 4,505), which suggests it edges out the W4190M across a broader set of metrics, even if that edge is slim. Its PassMark G3D score of 3,671 and GPU compute score of 1,437 indicate respectable graphics and compute performance for its class. The W4190M has no comparable data, so we cannot claim it wins anywhere.

The W4190M's potential advantages are not visible in the data. It has no benchmark wins, no higher scores, and no architectural feature that outperforms the RX 560. Its only distinguishing traits are its MXM form factor and lower power draw (though TDP is not listed, the 28 nm process and lower clocks suggest efficiency, but no numbers confirm this). If a system requires an MXM module, the W4190M is the only one of the two that fits. But that is a physical form-factor win, not a performance win.

For users prioritizing compute performance, the RX 560 is the only choice. For users constrained to MXM slots, the W4190M is the only option, but the data does not endorse it on merit. The RX 560's 265.6% OpenCL lead is the single most significant number in this comparison. It defines the matchup. The W4190M's absence from all other benchmarks leaves a gap, but that gap does not favor it. The RX 560 wins where it matters, and the W4190M wins nowhere measurable.