AMD FirePro W4190M vs NVIDIA GeForce 930M Comparison

The AMD FirePro W4190M and NVIDIA GeForce 930M are both end-of-life mobile graphics processors from 2015, targeting fundamentally different use cases despite their similar vintage. The data shows a clear performance hierarchy, but the architectural and feature differences paint a more nuanced picture than raw scores alone.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it delivers a decisive result. The NVIDIA GeForce 930M scores 5046, while the AMD FirePro W4190M scores 4505. That represents a 10.7% advantage for the NVIDIA part, which is a substantial margin in the context of these low-power mobile chips.

This single benchmark win gives NVIDIA a 1-0 record in the head-to-head comparison. The GeForce 930M's OpenCL score also places it above its own average benchmark score of 4388, indicating that its peak performance in this particular test is notably stronger than its overall standing might suggest.

Looking at the rival landscape, the FirePro W4190M sits in a tight cluster of similar performers. It is essentially tied with the AMD Radeon R7 M260, scoring just 0.1% higher (4505 vs 4499). The Intel HD Graphics P530 is 1.2% ahead, and the AMD Radeon RX 560 is 1.4% ahead. Interestingly, the FirePro W4190M edges out the AMD Radeon R5 M230 by 1.6%. These deltas are all within a narrow 3% band, suggesting that the FirePro W4190M is firmly positioned in the mid-range of mobile graphics performance from its era.

The GeForce 930M's rival comparisons reveal a slightly different story. It is 0.5% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M, a slightly older part, but 0.7% ahead of the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200. The comparison to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6, which is 1.2% behind, and the AMD FirePro W2100, which is 2.2% behind, shows that the 930M's OpenCL score is competitive even against much more modern or differently positioned hardware.

The raw theoretical throughput figures corroborate the benchmark outcome. The FirePro W4190M has a higher base clock of 825 MHz versus 549 MHz for the GeForce 930M, and its boost clock of 900 MHz is far above the 930M's fixed 549 MHz. This leads to a significant advantage in raw compute, with the FirePro offering 691.2 GFLOPS of FP32 performance compared to 421.6 GFLOPS for the GeForce. Yet the OpenCL test shows the NVIDIA part winning, which indicates that the GeForce 930M's architecture is more efficient at executing the specific workloads in that benchmark, or that memory bandwidth plays a larger role than raw ALU throughput.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for general compute workloads: the NVIDIA GeForce 930M. Its 10.7% lead in the Geekbench OpenCL test is the only direct measure we have, and it is a decisive one. For any application that relies on OpenCL acceleration, the GeForce 930M is the safer choice based strictly on this benchmark result.

However, the choice is not purely about raw performance. The AMD FirePro W4190M is a FirePro-branded part, which historically signals a focus on professional and workstation use cases. Its architecture, GCN 1.0, is older than NVIDIA's Maxwell, but it offers a higher FP32 throughput. If a workload is specifically tuned for AMD's architecture, the FirePro's theoretical advantage in raw shader throughput could potentially translate into better real-world performance in that niche.

The GeForce 930M, with its higher OpenCL score and lower power draw, appears better suited for consumer-oriented tasks that leverage OpenCL, such as media encoding or light content creation. The FirePro W4190M, despite losing the only head-to-head test, might still be the preferred choice in a professional environment where driver certification and stability for specific ISV applications are more important than raw benchmark numbers, though the provided data does not include any professional application tests to confirm this.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures. The AMD FirePro W4190M uses the GCN 1.0 architecture, based on the "Opal" chip, while the NVIDIA GeForce 930M employs the Maxwell architecture, built around the "GM108S" chip. Both are fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, and both have the same die size of 77 mm².

The transistor counts are close but not identical. The GeForce 930M packs 1,020 million transistors, while the FirePro W4190M has 950 million. This results in a slightly higher transistor density for the NVIDIA part: 13.2M per mm² versus 12.3M per mm² for the AMD chip.

The memory subsystems are dramatically different. The AMD FirePro W4190M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 64.00 GB/s. In contrast, the GeForce 930M uses 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, resulting in a much lower bandwidth of just 12.80 GB/s. This five-fold difference in memory bandwidth is the most striking architectural disparity between the two.

Both GPUs share the same fundamental compute unit counts: 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. The clock speeds, however, are very different. The FirePro W4190M runs at 825 MHz base and 900 MHz boost, while the GeForce 930M is locked at a flat 549 MHz with no boost. This explains why the FirePro has a much higher pixel rate (7.200 GPixel/s vs 4.392 GPixel/s) and texture rate (21.60 GTexel/s vs 13.18 GTexel/s).

The TDP is a major differentiator. The GeForce 930M is rated at 33 W, while the FirePro W4190M has no TDP listed in the data. The NVIDIA part is also an IGP (Integrated Graphics Processor), while the AMD part is an MXM Module, indicating different physical integration approaches. The FirePro W4190M also supports a slightly newer DirectX version (12 (11_1) vs 12 (11_0)) and an older Vulkan version (1.2.170 vs 1.4).

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher score in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 930M scores 5046, which is 10.7% higher than the AMD FirePro W4190M's score of 4505.

Q: Do both GPUs have the same amount of memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD FirePro W4190M and the NVIDIA GeForce 930M have 2 GB of memory, but the FirePro uses faster GDDR5 while the GeForce uses DDR3.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two?

A: The AMD FirePro W4190M has a memory bandwidth of 64.00 GB/s, while the NVIDIA GeForce 930M has a bandwidth of only 12.80 GB/s, a significant gap.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The AMD FirePro W4190M has a boost clock of 900 MHz, whereas the NVIDIA GeForce 930M has no boost clock and runs at a fixed 549 MHz.

Q: What is the process node for both chips?

A: Both the AMD FirePro W4190M and the NVIDIA GeForce 930M are manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC.

Q: How does the GeForce 930M compare to the AMD FirePro W2100?

A: The GeForce 930M scores 2.2% higher than the AMD FirePro W2100 in the nearest rival comparison, with scores of 5046 and 4295 respectively.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD FirePro W4190M wins on raw compute specifications. Its higher clock speeds (825 MHz base, 900 MHz boost) and significantly higher FP32 throughput (691.2 GFLOPS) give it a theoretical edge in workloads that are purely shader-bound. Its superior memory bandwidth of 64.00 GB/s versus 12.80 GB/s also makes it the better candidate for tasks that are memory-bandwidth limited, such as high-resolution texture streaming or large dataset manipulation. The FirePro W4190M also supports a newer DirectX version (12 (11_1) vs 12 (11_0)), which may provide better compatibility with certain modern applications.

The NVIDIA GeForce 930M wins on the only actual benchmark test we have, the Geekbench OpenCL score, by a margin of 10.7%. This is the most direct evidence of real-world performance. The GeForce 930M also has a lower TDP of 33 W, making it more power-efficient. Its newer Vulkan support (1.4 vs 1.2.170) could be an advantage for applications that use the Vulkan API. The fact that it is an IGP rather than an MXM module also suggests it is designed for a different, potentially more integrated, system design.

For a user prioritizing measured benchmark results and power efficiency, the GeForce 930M is the clear winner. For a user who values theoretical compute throughput, higher memory bandwidth, and a professional-grade FirePro brand, the AMD FirePro W4190M has distinct advantages, even though it loses the one available benchmark.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category. The architecture is a fundamental difference: GCN 1.0 for AMD versus Maxwell for NVIDIA. The transistor count is 950 million for the FirePro W4190M and 1,020 million for the GeForce 930M, with densities of 12.3M / mm² and 13.2M / mm² respectively.

Clock speeds are drastically different. The FirePro W4190M runs at 825 MHz base and 900 MHz boost, while the GeForce 930M is fixed at 549 MHz for both base and boost. The memory clocks also differ, with the FirePro at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) and the GeForce at 800 MHz (1600 Mbps effective).

Memory type and bus width are major differentiators. The FirePro uses GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, while the GeForce uses DDR3 on a 64-bit bus. This leads to the bandwidth difference already noted: 64.00 GB/s versus 12.80 GB/s.

The pixel rate (7.200 GPixel/s vs 4.392 GPixel/s) and texture rate (21.60 GTexel/s vs 13.18 GTexel/s) both favor the AMD part. The TDP is listed only for the GeForce 930M at 33 W, with no value given for the FirePro. The slot width differs: MXM Module for AMD, IGP for NVIDIA. The bus interface is the same for both (PCIe 3.0 x8), and the display outputs are also identical (Portable Device Dependent).

API support differs slightly. The FirePro supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the GeForce supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.4. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The release dates differ, with the GeForce 930M launching earlier (March 2015) than the FirePro W4190M (November 2015). The production status is end-of-life for both, and neither has a launch MSRP listed.