GPU Comparison

The AMD FirePro W4190M and NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions from different eras, built on the same 28 nm TSMC process. While they occupy a similar performance percentile, the benchmark data reveals a decisive winner in compute workloads, though architectural differences explain why the comparison is not entirely one-sided.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark available is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is lopsided. The AMD FirePro W4190M scores 4505, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M scores 2680. That represents a 68.1% advantage for the AMD part, a massive margin in any compute-oriented task. The data shows the FirePro W4190M delivering nearly 1.7 times the OpenCL performance of the GT 645M, which places the AMD part in a completely different performance class despite both cards targeting similar mobile segments.

Putting these scores into context with their nearest rivals clarifies the picture. The FirePro W4190M's 4505 OpenCL score puts it 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 M260 (4499) and just 1.2% behind the Intel HD Graphics P530 (4560). It also trails the AMD Radeon RX 560 (4569) by only 1.4%, suggesting that in raw compute, the W4190M punches well above its modest specifications. The GT 645M's OpenCL score of 2680 is not directly compared to its rivals in the head-to-head, but its average benchmark score of 4411 across all tests (including Metal and Vulkan) places it 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 930M (4388) and 1.2% ahead of the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 (4360). Interestingly, the GT 645M's average is 1.8% above the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6 (4335), though that comparison likely reflects the RTX 4070's score being from a different benchmark suite.

The win tally is simple: the FirePro W4190M wins 1 benchmark, the GT 645M wins 0. However, the GT 645M has additional benchmark results in Metal and Vulkan that the FirePro W4190M lacks. The GT 645M scores 5679 in Geekbench Metal and 4875 in Geekbench Vulkan, both of which are higher than its OpenCL score. This suggests the NVIDIA part has better API versatility, even if its raw OpenCL compute is far behind.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD FirePro W4190M uses the Opal chip based on GCN 1.0 architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process. It packs 950 million transistors into a 77 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M uses the GK107 chip based on Kepler architecture, also from TSMC on 28 nm, but with 1,270 million transistors on a 118 mm² die, giving a lower density of 10.8 million per square millimeter.

Memory configurations differ substantially. The FirePro W4190M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The GT 645M also has 2 GB on a 128-bit bus, but uses DDR3 memory, resulting in just 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth, less than half the AMD part's throughput. This memory bandwidth gap is likely a major contributor to the OpenCL performance disparity, as compute workloads often scale with memory bandwidth.

Compute resources are similar in shading units, both have 384, but the distribution differs. The FirePro W4190M has 24 texture mapping units and 8 ROPs, while the GT 645M has 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs. This gives the NVIDIA part higher texture fillrate at 24.96 GTexel/s versus 21.60 GTexel/s for AMD, and higher pixel fillrate at 6.240 GPixel/s versus 7.200 GPixel/s for AMD, wait, the AMD part actually has the higher pixel rate. Correcting that: the FirePro W4190M achieves 7.200 GPixel/s, while the GT 645M achieves 6.240 GPixel/s. The GT 645M wins on texture rate, the W4190M wins on pixel rate.

Clock speeds favor AMD. The FirePro W4190M runs at 825 MHz base and 900 MHz boost, while the GT 645M runs at 709 MHz base and 780 MHz boost. This clock advantage, combined with the faster memory, pushes the AMD part's FP32 performance to 691.2 GFLOPS, versus 599.0 GFLOPS for the NVIDIA part. The GT 645M is rated at 32 W TDP, while the FirePro W4190M has no listed TDP, it uses an MXM Module slot width, whereas the GT 645M is an IGP. Both use PCIe 3.0, but the AMD part uses x8 lanes while NVIDIA uses x16.

API support shows a split. The FirePro W4190M supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The GT 645M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. NVIDIA has a slightly higher Vulkan version, while AMD has a slightly higher DirectX feature level.

Where Each One Wins

The FirePro W4190M is the clear winner in OpenCL compute workloads. Its 68.1% lead over the GT 645M in the head-to-head benchmark makes it the obvious choice for any application that relies on OpenCL acceleration, such as certain productivity tools, scientific computing, or GPU-accelerated rendering. The AMD part's higher memory bandwidth (64.00 GB/s vs 28.80 GB/s) and higher clock speeds (900 MHz boost vs 780 MHz boost) directly contribute to this dominance. Its FP32 throughput of 691.2 GFLOPS versus 599.0 GFLOPS further reinforces this position.

The GT 645M wins in versatility and API coverage. It has three benchmark results, Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan, while the FirePro W4190M only has OpenCL. Its Metal score of 5679 and Vulkan score of 4875 are both strong, suggesting that on Apple platforms or in Vulkan-based applications, the NVIDIA part may be more competitive than its OpenCL deficit suggests. The GT 645M also has higher texture fillrate (24.96 GTexel/s vs 21.60 GTexel/s) and more TMUs (32 vs 24), which could benefit certain texture-bound workloads.

For gaming, the picture is mixed based on architectural traits. The GT 645M's higher ROP count (16 vs 8) and larger bus interface (PCIe 3.0 x16 vs x8) could help in certain scenarios, but the FirePro W4190M's massive bandwidth advantage and higher pixel rate suggest it would handle higher resolutions or memory-intensive effects better. Neither card is modern, and both are end-of-life, so the practical differences may be moot for current software.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The AMD FirePro W4190M, with 691.2 GFLOPS FP32 performance versus 599.0 GFLOPS for the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M. This is reflected in the OpenCL benchmark where the AMD part scores 4505 versus 2680.

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

A: The FirePro W4190M is 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 M260 and 1.2% behind the Intel HD Graphics P530. The GT 645M is 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 930M and 1.2% ahead of the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200.

Q: What memory configurations do these GPUs use?

A: Both have 2 GB on a 128-bit bus, but the FirePro W4190M uses GDDR5 with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the GT 645M uses DDR3 with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU supports more modern APIs?

A: The FirePro W4190M supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the GT 645M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. The NVIDIA part has a slightly newer Vulkan version.

Q: Do these GPUs have any benchmark results outside OpenCL?

A: Only the GT 645M, which scores 5679 in Geekbench Metal and 4875 in Geekbench Vulkan. The FirePro W4190M only has an OpenCL result.

Q: What are the physical specifications of these chips?

A: The FirePro W4190M uses a 77 mm² die with 950 million transistors, while the GT 645M uses a 118 mm² die with 1,270 million transistors. Both are 28 nm parts from TSMC.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the AMD FirePro W4190M is the superior compute part. Its 68.1% lead in OpenCL performance over the GT 645M is decisive, and its memory bandwidth advantage (64.00 GB/s vs 28.80 GB/s) makes it the better choice for any bandwidth-sensitive workload. The AMD part also leads in pixel rate (7.200 GPixel/s vs 6.240 GPixel/s) and FP32 performance (691.2 GFLOPS vs 599.0 GFLOPS).

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M, however, is not without merit. Its higher texture fillrate (24.96 GTexel/s vs 21.60 GTexel/s), more TMUs (32 vs 24), and more ROPs (16 vs 8) could make it preferable for certain graphics pipelines. Its additional Metal and Vulkan benchmark scores indicate broader API support, and its lower TDP of 32 W (versus no listed TDP for AMD) suggests better power efficiency.

For users prioritizing compute performance, OpenCL acceleration, or memory-intensive tasks, the FirePro W4190M is the clear choice. For users who need Vulkan or Metal support, or who favor texture throughput, the GT 645M may be more appropriate despite its lower raw compute. Both are end-of-life products, so the decision ultimately comes down to which workload matters more. The data shows a 68.1% compute gap in favor of AMD, and that is the headline number to remember.