AMD FirePro W4300 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records only a single direct benchmark comparison between these two graphics cards: the Geekbench OpenCL test. In that measurement, the AMD FirePro W4300 scores 11,225 points, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 scores 9,294 points. This gives AMD a decisive 20.8% advantage, the sole win recorded in the head-to-head dataset. The margin is substantial enough to classify as a clear generational leap in raw compute throughput, especially considering the five-year gap in release timing.

The FirePro W4300’s score sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database, placing it in the middle of the pack. Its nearest rivals reinforce this positioning: the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 scores 11,228, a delta of 0%, meaning the two are effectively identical in OpenCL performance. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M comes in at 11,261, which is 0.3% higher, while the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q and RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q both score 11,088, putting them 1.2% behind the FirePro W4300. These are tight margins, suggesting the FirePro W4300 is a stable, mid-tier performer that trades blows with professional and high-end mobile parts without any dramatic swings.

The GeForce GTX 465, by contrast, scores 9,294, placing it at the 46th percentile. Its nearest rivals cluster very closely around this figure: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M scores 9,302, a 0.1% deficit; the AMD Radeon R7 M380 scores 9,313, 0.2% lower; the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 scores 9,273, 0.2% higher; and the AMD Radeon Vega 8 scores 9,221, 0.8% behind. This tight grouping indicates that the GTX 465, despite its age, still performs at a level comparable to much newer entry-level and mid-range parts. However, it simply cannot match the FirePro W4300’s OpenCL throughput; the 20.8% delta is far larger than any of the differences within either card’s own rival cluster.

Looking at the underlying specifications that drive this result, the FirePro W4300’s 1,428.5 GFLOPS of FP32 compute power is a direct contributor to its higher OpenCL score. The GTX 465 offers 855.4 GFLOPS, a figure that is roughly 40% lower. This raw compute advantage is the primary reason for the benchmark gap. The FirePro W4300 also benefits from a newer architecture, GCN 2.0 on a 28 nm process, compared to the Fermi architecture on a 40 nm process for the GTX 465. The transistor density tells the story: the FirePro packs 13.0 million transistors per square millimeter into a 160 mm² die, while the GTX 465 spreads 3,100 million transistors across a much larger 529 mm² die at only 5.9 million per square millimeter. Efficiency is not just about performance; it is about how that performance is achieved.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous in a straight performance comparison. The AMD FirePro W4300 wins the only recorded head-to-head test by 20.8%. For any workload that relies on OpenCL compute, the FirePro W4300 is the stronger option. Its score of 11,225 versus 9,294 is a decisive margin, not a marginal one. The data shows no benchmark where the GTX 465 takes the lead.

Who should pick the AMD FirePro W4300? Anyone whose primary concern is raw compute performance in modern OpenCL applications. The card is built on a newer process node, 28 nm versus 40 nm, which contributes to its superior efficiency. It also offers 4 GB of GDDR5 memory with a 128-bit bus, providing 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 465 has 1024 MB (1 GB) of memory on a 256-bit bus, yielding 102.7 GB/s. Interestingly, the GTX 465 actually has a slight bandwidth advantage, but this does not translate into a benchmark win, as the FirePro’s compute advantage dominates.

Who should pick the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465? The data does not support picking it for performance reasons. Its only edge lies in its full 256-bit memory bus and higher bandwidth, but the recorded benchmark shows no scenario where this helps. The GTX 465 also has a higher TDP of 200 W compared to the FirePro’s 50 W, and it requires two 6-pin power connectors while the FirePro needs none. The FirePro is a single-slot card, while the GTX 465 is dual-slot. In every measurable performance metric from the database, the FirePro wins. The GTX 465’s sole distinction is its launch MSRP of 279 USD, which is historical data and not a current recommendation.

Where Each One Wins

The win tally is simple: the AMD FirePro W4300 has 1 win, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 has 0 wins. The only benchmark in the head-to-head set is Geekbench OpenCL, and the FirePro takes it. There is no recorded test where the GTX 465 outperforms the FirePro W4300.

For use-case analysis, the FirePro W4300 is the clear choice for compute-heavy tasks such as rendering, simulation, or any workload that leverages OpenCL acceleration. Its 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operations units provide a solid foundation for parallel processing. The texture rate of 44.64 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 14.88 GPixel/s are both higher than the GTX 465’s 26.75 GTexel/s and 13.38 GPixel/s. This means the FirePro is not only faster in raw compute but also in texture and pixel throughput, making it suitable for graphics workloads that stress these subsystems.

The GTX 465, with its 352 shading units, 44 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, has a higher ROP count, which could theoretically benefit certain rasterization scenarios. However, the recorded data shows no benchmark win to support this. Its higher memory bandwidth of 102.7 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s is its only quantitative advantage, but without a corresponding benchmark victory, this remains a theoretical benefit rather than a demonstrated one. The GTX 465 also supports DirectX 12 at feature level 11_0, while the FirePro supports 12_0, indicating a newer feature set for AMD. Neither card has Vulkan support listed for NVIDIA, while AMD lists Vulkan 1.2.170.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL benchmarks?

A: The AMD FirePro W4300 scores 11,225 points, which is 20.8% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465’s score of 9,294 points.

Q: How does the FirePro W4300 compare to its closest rivals?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 scores 11,228, a 0% delta, making them virtually identical. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q and RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q score 11,088, which is 1.2% lower.

Q: What is the GTX 465’s position relative to its nearest competitors?

A: The GTX 465 scores 9,294, which is 0.1% lower than the GTX 850M (9,302), 0.2% lower than the Radeon R7 M380 (9,313), 0.2% higher than the GTX 960 (9,273), and 0.8% higher than the Radeon Vega 8 (9,221).

Q: Does the GTX 465 have any advantage in memory bandwidth?

A: Yes, the GTX 465 has a 256-bit bus with 102.7 GB/s bandwidth, while the FirePro W4300 has a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s. However, this does not result in a benchmark win for the GTX 465.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The FirePro W4300 has a TDP of 50 W and requires no power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The GTX 465 has a TDP of 200 W, requires two 6-pin connectors, and a suggested PSU of 550 W.

Q: Which card has a higher raw compute output?

A: The FirePro W4300 delivers 1,428.5 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the GTX 465 delivers 855.4 GFLOPS. The FirePro’s compute output is significantly higher.

Architecture Differences

The AMD FirePro W4300 is built on the GCN 2.0 architecture, using the Bonaire chip, fabricated 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 13.0 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 uses the Fermi architecture, with the GF100 chip, on a 40 nm process, also at TSMC. It packs 3,100 million transistors on a much larger 529 mm² die, resulting in a density of only 5.9 million per square millimeter. This difference in process technology is a key factor in the FirePro’s superior efficiency and performance per watt.

The memory subsystems differ significantly. The FirePro W4300 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, running at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective), delivering 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 465 has 1024 MB (1 GB) of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, running at 802 MHz (3.2 Gbps effective), delivering 102.7 GB/s. While the GTX 465 has higher bandwidth, the FirePro has four times the memory capacity, which is crucial for larger datasets in compute workloads.

The compute units differ in scale. The FirePro W4300 has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The GTX 465 has 352 shading units, 44 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The FirePro has more than double the shading units, which directly contributes to its FP32 output of 1,428.5 GFLOPS versus the GTX 465’s 855.4 GFLOPS. The GTX 465’s higher ROP count (32 versus 16) is offset by its lower pixel rate of 13.38 GPixel/s versus the FirePro’s 14.88 GPixel/s, indicating that the FirePro’s ROPs are more efficient.

The interface and display outputs also differ. The FirePro uses PCIe 3.0 x16 and offers four mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. The GTX 465 uses PCIe 2.0 x16 and provides two DVI ports and one mini-HDMI 1.3a. The FirePro’s newer PCIe standard allows for higher data transfer rates, though the recorded benchmarks do not isolate this variable. API support shows the FirePro with DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the GTX 465 has DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but no Vulkan support listed.

The physical design is another differentiator. The FirePro W4300 is a single-slot card measuring 171 mm in length and 69 mm in height, with no power connectors and a TDP of 50 W. The GTX 465 is a dual-slot card measuring 241 mm in length, with two 6-pin power connectors and a TDP of 200 W. This makes the FirePro dramatically easier to integrate into compact systems and far less demanding on power delivery. The production status for both is end-of-life, with the FirePro released in November 2015 and the GTX 465 in May 2010. The FirePro’s predecessor is FirePro Terascale, and its successor is Radeon Pro GCN, while the GTX 465’s predecessor is GeForce 200 and its successor is GeForce 500.