AMD FirePro W4300 vs AMD Radeon R7 M380 Comparison

AMD FirePro W4300 vs AMD Radeon R7 M380: the database records a single benchmark comparison, Geekbench OpenCL, which provides a decisive result. The FirePro W4300 scores 11225, while the Radeon R7 M380 scores 9313. This places the FirePro W4300 20.5% ahead, a substantial gap that defines the entire competitive relationship between these two mobile and workstation-oriented GPUs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole recorded head-to-head benchmark is the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this test, the AMD FirePro W4300 achieves a score of 11225, which is 20.5% higher than the AMD Radeon R7 M380's 9313. This is a decisive victory for the FirePro W4300, and the data shows no benchmark where the R7 M380 wins. The FirePro W4300 is the winner in 1 out of 1 recorded tests, while the R7 M380 wins 0.

This 20.5% delta is significant, indicating that the FirePro W4300 provides a meaningfully higher level of compute performance in this OpenCL workload. The score difference is not marginal; it represents a clear performance tier separation between the two products. The FirePro W4300's score of 11225 also positions it at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database, whereas the R7 M380 sits at the 46th percentile. This percentile difference confirms that the FirePro W4300 is not just faster than this specific rival, but also ranks higher in the broader performance distribution.

The nearest rivals for the FirePro W4300 further contextualize its score. The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 scores 11228, a delta of 0%, meaning the FirePro W4300 is virtually tied with that card. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M scores 11261, making the FirePro W4300 only 0.3% slower. Interestingly, the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q and RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q both score 11088, placing them 1.2% behind the FirePro W4300. This shows that the FirePro W4300's performance level is competitive with a range of different cards, from professional workstation GPUs to high-end mobile gaming parts.

For the Radeon R7 M380, its nearest rivals show a different performance neighborhood. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M scores 9302, a 0.1% delta, placing it essentially at parity. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 scores 9294, a 0.2% delta. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 scores 9273, which is 0.4% behind the R7 M380. Finally, the AMD Radeon Vega 8 scores 9221, placing it 1% behind. These rivals show that the R7 M380's performance is clustered around the 9300-point mark, and the 20.5% gap to the FirePro W4300 represents a significant leap beyond this cluster.

The benchmark results indicate that the FirePro W4300's advantage is substantial. A 20.5% lead in a compute-heavy OpenCL test suggests that the FirePro W4300 is the clearly superior product for tasks that rely on raw shader throughput and memory bandwidth. The data does not support any scenario where the R7 M380 would outperform the FirePro W4300 in this specific metric.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD FirePro W4300 scores 11225, which is 20.5% higher than the AMD Radeon R7 M380's score of 9313 in the geekbench_opencl test.

Q: What is the percentile ranking for each GPU?

A: The AMD FirePro W4300 is at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, while the AMD Radeon R7 M380 is at the 46th percentile.

Q: How does the FirePro W4300 compare to its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200?

A: The FirePro W4300 scores 11225, while the Radeon Pro WX 3200 scores 11228, resulting in a 0% delta, meaning they are effectively tied in performance.

Q: What is the performance gap between the R7 M380 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960?

A: The R7 M380 scores 9313, which is 0.4% higher than the GeForce GTX 960's score of 9273.

Q: Does the Radeon R7 M380 win any benchmark against the FirePro W4300?

A: No, the recorded data shows the FirePro W4300 winning the only head-to-head benchmark (geekbench_opencl), with the R7 M380 winning 0 tests.

Q: How many shading units does each GPU have?

A: The AMD FirePro W4300 has 768 shading units, while the AMD Radeon R7 M380 has 640 shading units.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the single recorded benchmark, the AMD FirePro W4300 wins outright in the compute performance category. The 20.5% lead in Geekbench OpenCL indicates that the FirePro W4300 is the stronger choice for any workload that leverages general-purpose GPU computing, such as OpenCL-accelerated applications, rendering tasks, or scientific simulations. Its higher score at the 50th percentile versus the R7 M380's 46th percentile reinforces this, showing that the FirePro W4300 sits in a stronger position within the broader GPU landscape.

The AMD Radeon R7 M380, with its 0 wins, does not have a single benchmark victory to claim. However, the data suggests that its performance level is competitive with other GPUs in its immediate class, such as the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M (0.1% delta) and the GeForce GTX 465 (0.2% delta). For users with workloads that fall within that performance band, the R7 M380 would be a comparable option, but the recorded data does not support any scenario where it outperforms the FirePro W4300.

The use-case split is therefore clear: the FirePro W4300 is designed for and excels at compute-intensive professional tasks, as its name and benchmark results suggest. The R7 M380 appears to be a more mainstream mobile part, and while it can handle similar workloads, the data shows it will do so with significantly lower performance. In any application where Geekbench OpenCL score is predictive of real-world performance, the FirePro W4300 is the definitive winner.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in several key specification areas, which helps explain the benchmark results. The AMD FirePro W4300 is built on the Bonaire chip with a GCN 2.0 architecture, while the AMD Radeon R7 M380 uses the Tropo chip with a GCN 1.0 architecture. The FirePro W4300 features 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 render output units (ROPs). The R7 M380 has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, showing a direct reduction in compute resources.

Memory configurations also differ significantly. The FirePro W4300 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The R7 M380 also has 4 GB of memory, but it uses DDR3 on the same 128-bit bus, resulting in only 32.00 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a threefold difference in memory bandwidth, which is a critical factor in compute performance and likely contributes heavily to the 20.5% benchmark gap.

Clock speeds are another point of divergence. The FirePro W4300 has a memory clock of 1500 MHz, translating to 6 Gbps effective. The R7 M380 has a base clock of 900 MHz and a boost clock of 915 MHz, with a memory clock of 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective). The FirePro W4300 does not list base or boost clocks, but its pixel rate is 14.88 GPixel/s versus 14.64 GPixel/s for the R7 M380, and its texture rate is 44.64 GTexel/s versus 36.60 GTexel/s. The FP32 performance is 1,428.5 GFLOPS for the FirePro W4300, compared to 1,171.2 GFLOPS for the R7 M380.

The physical and power characteristics also differ. The FirePro W4300 has a TDP of 50 W and is a single-slot card with no power connectors, requiring a suggested PSU of 250 W. The R7 M380 has no recorded TDP, slot width, power connectors, or suggested PSU, reflecting its mobile-oriented design. The FirePro W4300 also has a defined length of 171 mm (6.7 inches) and height of 69 mm (2.7 inches), while the R7 M380 has no recorded dimensions. The FirePro W4300 provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, whereas the R7 M380 has no recorded display outputs.

Architecture Differences

The architectural differences between these two GPUs are fundamental and explain their performance disparity. The AMD FirePro W4300 is based on GCN 2.0 architecture, while the AMD Radeon R7 M380 uses the older GCN 1.0 architecture. This generational difference means the FirePro W4300 benefits from architectural improvements in compute efficiency and feature support.

The chip details reinforce this. The FirePro W4300 uses the Bonaire chip, which is manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 2,080 million transistors on a die size of 160 mm², giving a transistor density of 13.0M per mm². The R7 M380 uses the Tropo chip, also on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but with 1,500 million transistors on a smaller 123 mm² die, resulting in a lower density of 12.2M per mm². The FirePro W4300's larger transistor count and higher density indicate a more complex and capable design.

The production generations also differ. The FirePro W4300 belongs to the FirePro GCN (Wx300) generation, with a predecessor of FirePro Terascale and a successor of Radeon Pro GCN. The R7 M380 is from the Gem System (R7 M300) generation, with a predecessor of Solar System and a successor of Polaris Mobile. This places the FirePro W4300 in a professional workstation lineage, while the R7 M380 is part of a mobile graphics family.

Feature support shows a key difference in DirectX capability. The FirePro W4300 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the R7 M380 only supports DirectX 12 (11_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170. The FirePro W4300's higher DirectX feature level, combined with its GCN 2.0 architecture, newer chip, and significantly higher memory bandwidth, provides a clear architectural advantage that is reflected in its 20.5% benchmark lead. The R7 M380, with its older GCN 1.0 architecture and DDR3 memory, is simply outclassed in this comparison.