AMD FirePro W4190M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti has a higher average benchmark score of 4193 compared to the AMD FirePro W4190M’s 4505. However, this average is skewed by the GTX 1050 Ti’s many additional test results; in the only shared test, Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA card scores 18,129 versus 4,505 for the FirePro.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the head-to-head OpenCL test?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti wins the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark by a delta of -75.2% from the perspective of the AMD FirePro W4190M. This means the FirePro’s score is only about a quarter of the GTX 1050 Ti’s result — a decisive margin.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: The AMD FirePro W4190M has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti doubles the capacity to 4 GB of GDDR5 on the same 128-bit bus, but with significantly higher bandwidth of 112.1 GB/s.

Q: How do their transistor counts and process nodes compare?

A: The FirePro W4190M is built on TSMC’s 28 nm process with 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.3M / mm². The GTX 1050 Ti uses Samsung’s 14 nm node, packs 3,300 million transistors on a 132 mm² die, and achieves 25.0M / mm² density.

Q: What is the thermal design power (TDP) difference?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti has a TDP of 75 W, while the AMD FirePro W4190M’s TDP is not specified in the data. The GTX 1050 Ti also lists a suggested PSU of 250 W, whereas the FirePro’s suggested PSU is absent from the record.

Q: Which card supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the AMD FirePro W4190M supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both cards list OpenGL 4.6 support.

Where Each One Wins

The data presents a lopsided picture: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti wins the only directly comparable benchmark, and its broader benchmark suite shows strengths across many workloads. The AMD FirePro W4190M, by contrast, has a single Geekbench OpenCL score of 4505, which places it in the 26th percentile of all GPUs. The GTX 1050 Ti’s OpenCL score of 18,129 is more than four times higher, and its percentile rank is 25, nearly identical despite the huge score gap — an artifact of different benchmark distributions.

Looking at the GTX 1050 Ti’s full suite, it dominates in compute and graphics tasks. Its Passmark G3D score of 6340 indicates strong general 3D rendering capability, while its Passmark GPU Compute score of 2652 shows solid parallel processing. The Geekbench Metal result of 7834 and Vulkan score of 10,001 reveal cross-platform compute strength. In legacy DirectX workloads, the GTX 1050 Ti scores 104 in Passmark DirectX 9, 45 in DirectX 11, and 31 in DirectX 10, with a lower 26 in DirectX 12 — suggesting older API performance is comparatively stronger.

The FirePro W4190M has no wins in the head-to-head record. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon R7 M260 (average score 4499, delta 0.1%), Intel HD Graphics P530 (4560, delta -1.2%), and AMD Radeon RX 560 (4569, delta -1.4%). This places the FirePro in a low-end mobile workstation tier, roughly parity with integrated graphics and entry-level discrete parts. For users prioritizing raw compute in OpenCL, the GTX 1050 Ti is the clear choice; the FirePro’s only relative advantage is its MXM form factor for specific mobile workstation chassis.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different architectural generations. The AMD FirePro W4190M uses GCN 1.0 architecture on the Opal chip, a first-generation Graphics Core Next design. It is built on TSMC’s 28 nm process with 950 million transistors, a die size of 77 mm², and a transistor density of 12.3M / mm². The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti employs Pascal architecture on the GP107 chip, fabricated by Samsung on a 14 nm node. It packs 3,300 million transistors into a 132 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 25.0M / mm² — more than double the FirePro’s density.

Compute resources differ sharply. The FirePro W4190M has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and only 8 ROPs. The GTX 1050 Ti doubles the shader count to 768, doubles TMUs to 48, and quadruples ROPs to 32. These raw counts explain the massive throughput differences: the FirePro delivers 691.2 GFLOPS FP32, 7.200 GPixel/s pixel rate, and 21.60 GTexel/s texture rate, while the GTX 1050 Ti reaches 2.138 TFLOPS FP32, 44.54 GPixel/s, and 66.82 GTexel/s.

Clock behavior also reflects different design goals. The FirePro runs at 825 MHz base and 900 MHz boost, with memory at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective). The GTX 1050 Ti clocks much higher at 1291 MHz base and 1392 MHz boost, with memory at 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective). The GTX 1050 Ti’s FP16 rate of 33.41 GFLOPS (1:64) is a token capability, while the FirePro’s FP16 is not specified — neither card is optimized for half-precision compute.

API support differs: the FirePro is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the GTX 1050 Ti supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The GTX 1050 Ti also has a wider bus interface (PCIe 3.0 x16 versus x8 for the FirePro), which matters for data transfer in compute workloads.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD FirePro W4190M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti |

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

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Pascal |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Samsung |

| Transistors | 950 million | 3,300 million |

| Die Size | 77 mm² | 132 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.3M / mm² | 25.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 825 MHz | 1291 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 900 MHz | 1392 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz (4 Gbps) | 1752 MHz (7 Gbps) |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Bandwidth | 64.00 GB/s | 112.1 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 384 | 768 |

| TMUs | 24 | 48 |

| ROPs | 8 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 7.200 GPixel/s | 44.54 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 21.60 GTexel/s | 66.82 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 691.2 GFLOPS | 2.138 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not specified | 33.41 GFLOPS (1:64) |

| TDP | Not specified | 75 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Dual-slot |

| Suggested PSU | Not specified | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Length | Not specified | 145 mm (5.7 inches) |

| Height | Not specified | 111 mm (4.4 inches) |

| Release Date | 2015-11-11 | 2016-10-24 |

The GTX 1050 Ti also lists a launch MSRP of 139 USD. The FirePro has no launch MSRP in the record.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

There is exactly one benchmark where both GPUs have recorded scores: Geekbench OpenCL. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti scores 18,129, while the AMD FirePro W4190M scores 4,505. The delta is -75.2% from the FirePro’s side, meaning the FirePro trails by over three-quarters. In absolute terms, the GTX 1050 Ti delivers roughly 4.02 times the OpenCL performance of the FirePro.

This single result is decisive. The FirePro’s score of 4,505 puts it in the 26th percentile of all GPUs, and its nearest rivals are all in the 4,500–4,600 range: the AMD Radeon R7 M260 (4,499, delta 0.1%), Intel HD Graphics P530 (4,560, delta -1.2%), AMD Radeon RX 560 (4,569, delta -1.4%), and AMD Radeon R5 M230 (4,577, delta -1.6%). The FirePro is essentially tied with these parts, all of which represent entry-level or integrated graphics.

The GTX 1050 Ti’s OpenCL result of 18,129 is in a different league. Its average benchmark score across all tests is 4,193, but this is pulled down by low scores in legacy DirectX tests (26–104 range) and the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 305. Its strong compute scores — Geekbench Vulkan at 10,001, Geekbench Metal at 7,834, Passmark GPU Compute at 2,652, and Passmark G3D at 6,340 — show that the OpenCL result is not an outlier. The GTX 1050 Ti’s nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Radeon R5 M330 (4,170, delta 0.6%), NVIDIA Quadro K2100M (4,151, delta 1%), NVIDIA Quadro K3000M (4,241, delta -1.1%), and AMD Radeon Vega 3 (4,268, delta -1.8%). These are all far below the GTX 1050 Ti’s OpenCL score, indicating that the average benchmark metric underrepresents its compute capability.

The head-to-head record shows 1 win for the GTX 1050 Ti and 0 for the FirePro. No other shared benchmarks exist in the data.

The Verdict

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti is the clear winner on every measurable axis in this comparison. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 18,129 versus 4,505 is a 75.2% margin, and that is the only direct comparison available. The GTX 1050 Ti also offers superior specifications across the board: 4 GB memory versus 2 GB, 112.1 GB/s bandwidth versus 64.00 GB/s, 768 shading units versus 384, 32 ROPs versus 8, and a boost clock of 1392 MHz versus 900 MHz. Its Pascal architecture on 14 nm delivers 2.138 TFLOPS FP32, more than triple the FirePro’s 691.2 GFLOPS.

For users who need raw compute performance, the GTX 1050 Ti is the only rational choice. Its PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, dual-slot design, and 75 W TDP make it a conventional desktop card, while the FirePro’s MXM module form factor and portable-device-dependent outputs target laptop workstations. The FirePro’s nearest rivals are integrated graphics like the Intel HD Graphics P530 and low-end discrete parts like the Radeon R7 M260, all scoring within 1.6% of it. The GTX 1050 Ti, by contrast, sits in the 25th percentile but with a benchmark suite that shows high compute peaks.

The FirePro W4190M might still be relevant in legacy mobile workstation deployments where its MXM form factor and GCN 1.0 architecture are required for specific chassis. But from a performance standpoint, the data offers no scenario where the FirePro wins. Its only advantage is the smaller die (77 mm² versus 132 mm²) and lower transistor count (950 million versus 3,300 million), which historically correlate with lower power draw — though the FirePro’s TDP is not specified in the record.

Choose the GTX 1050 Ti for any application requiring OpenCL compute, 3D rendering, or general GPU acceleration. Choose the FirePro W4190M only if the hardware form factor (MXM module) and legacy GCN 1.0 compatibility are non-negotiable constraints. In every benchmark recorded, the NVIDIA card wins.