AMD FirePro W600 vs AMD Radeon R7 M460 Comparison

The AMD Radeon R7 M460 and AMD FirePro W600 are both end-of-life graphics solutions from AMD, but they target very different roles and eras. The R7 M460 is a mobile-oriented part built on the newer GCN 3.0 architecture, while the FirePro W600 is a workstation card based on the older GCN 1.0 design. Despite their differences in age and intended use, their benchmark results are surprisingly close, with the R7 M460 holding a narrow lead in the sole available comparison.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this test, the AMD Radeon R7 M460 scores 6612, while the AMD FirePro W600 scores 6223. This gives the R7 M460 a 6.3% advantage, marking it as the clear winner in this single head-to-head matchup. The delta is modest but consistent — the R7 M460 outperforms the FirePro W600 by roughly 389 points on this workload.

Context from each card’s nearest rivals helps frame this result. The R7 M460’s score sits between the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 (6698, which is 1.3% higher) and the AMD Radeon HD 7730M (6581, which is 0.5% lower). Meanwhile, the FirePro W600’s 6223 is just 0.2% above the AMD Radeon HD 6950 (6210) and 0.9% below the NVIDIA Quadro K620 (6282). This places the two cards in adjacent performance tiers, with the R7 M460 occupying a slightly higher percentile rank — 38th percentile versus the FirePro W600’s 36th percentile among all GPUs.

The win count reinforces the picture: the R7 M460 wins 1 benchmark, while the FirePro W600 wins 0. That said, the 6.3% margin is not a landslide. In real-world OpenCL tasks, the difference would likely be perceptible but not transformative. The R7 M460’s lead is attributable to its newer architecture and higher clock speeds, but the FirePro W600 counters with a wider memory bus and more shading units, which keeps the gap from growing larger.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M460 scores 6612, which is 6.3% higher than the AMD FirePro W600’s 6223.

Q: How does each card compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The R7 M460 is 0.5% faster than the AMD Radeon HD 7730M and 0.9% faster than the Intel UHD Graphics P750, but 1.3% slower than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010. The FirePro W600 is 0.2% faster than the AMD Radeon HD 6950, but 0.7% slower than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 and 0.9% slower than the NVIDIA Quadro K620.

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

A: The FirePro W600 offers 64.00 GB/s bandwidth, which is nearly double the R7 M460’s 36.00 GB/s. This is due to the FirePro’s 128-bit bus width versus the R7’s 64-bit bus, despite both using GDDR5 memory.

Q: Which card has more shading units and texture mapping units?

A: The FirePro W600 has 512 shading units and 32 TMUs, compared to the R7 M460’s 384 shading units and 24 TMUs. The FirePro also has 16 ROPs versus the R7’s 8 ROPs.

Q: Do both cards support the same API levels?

A: Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170. However, the R7 M460 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the FirePro W600 only supports DirectX 12 (11_1).

Q: What is the physical size and power requirement of the FirePro W600?

A: The FirePro W600 is a single-slot card measuring 168 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 20 mm in width. It has a 75 W TDP, requires no power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations, which explains several key performance characteristics. The Radeon R7 M460 is built on GCN 3.0 with the Meso chip, while the FirePro W600 uses GCN 1.0 with the Cape Verde chip. Both are fabricated on the same 28 nm process at TSMC, and their transistor counts are nearly identical — 1,550 million for the R7 M460 versus 1,500 million for the FirePro W600. Die sizes are also close: 125 mm² for the R7 M460 and 123 mm² for the FirePro W600, resulting in transistor densities of 12.4M per mm² and 12.2M per mm², respectively.

The architectural gap manifests in how resources are allocated. The R7 M460’s GCN 3.0 design allows for a higher boost clock of 1024 MHz against a base of 730 MHz, while the FirePro W600’s clocks are not listed in the data. This clock advantage helps the R7 M460 achieve a higher texture rate of 24.58 GTexel/s, slightly above the FirePro W600’s 24.00 GTexel/s. However, the FirePro W600 compensates with more execution units: 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, versus the R7 M460’s 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. This gives the FirePro a higher pixel rate of 12.00 GPixel/s compared to the R7’s 8.192 GPixel/s.

FP32 performance is nearly a tie — the R7 M460 delivers 786.4 GFLOPS, while the FirePro W600 delivers 768.0 GFLOPS. The R7 M460 also lists FP16 performance at 786.4 GFLOPS (1:1), while the FirePro W600 has no FP16 data listed. The memory subsystem differs sharply: the R7 M460 runs at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) on a 64-bit bus, yielding 36.00 GB/s, whereas the FirePro W600 runs at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) on a 128-bit bus, yielding 64.00 GB/s. This bandwidth advantage is the FirePro W600’s most significant architectural asset.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across several specification fields. The R7 M460 uses a 64-bit memory bus, while the FirePro W600 uses a 128-bit bus — this directly explains the bandwidth gap. Memory type is the same (GDDR5), and both have 2 GB capacity, but the effective speeds differ: 4.5 Gbps for the R7 M460 versus 4 Gbps for the FirePro W600.

Clock behavior is another differentiator. The R7 M460 has explicit base and boost clocks of 730 MHz and 1024 MHz, respectively. The FirePro W600 lists no base or boost clock values in the data. In terms of raw throughput, the R7 M460’s pixel rate is 8.192 GPixel/s, while the FirePro W600’s is 12.00 GPixel/s. Texture rates are 24.58 GTexel/s for the R7 M460 and 24.00 GTexel/s for the FirePro W600.

Power and physical specifications only appear for the FirePro W600. It has a 75 W TDP, is single-slot, requires no power connectors, and suggests a 250 W PSU. Its dimensions are 168 mm by 111 mm by 20 mm. The R7 M460 has no listed TDP, slot width, power connectors, suggested PSU, or dimensions, reflecting its mobile-oriented design.

Bus interface also differs: the R7 M460 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the FirePro W600 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs are only specified for the FirePro W600, which offers 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2. The R7 M460 has no display output data. Release dates are far apart — the R7 M460 launched on May 14, 2016, while the FirePro W600 launched on June 12, 2012. The FirePro W600 has a launch MSRP of 599 USD, while the R7 M460 has no MSRP listed. Finally, the R7 M460 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), whereas the FirePro W600 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1).

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R7 M460 wins in the OpenCL benchmark, and its architecture provides advantages in several areas. Its higher boost clock of 1024 MHz and newer GCN 3.0 design deliver a 6.3% lead in Geekbench OpenCL. The R7 M460 also offers slightly higher texture rate (24.58 GTexel/s versus 24.00 GTexel/s) and marginally better FP32 performance (786.4 GFLOPS versus 768.0 GFLOPS). For applications that rely on compute throughput and newer API features — such as DirectX 12 (12_0) — the R7 M460 is the better choice. Its lower memory bandwidth (36.00 GB/s) is a limitation, but for tasks that are not bandwidth-bound, the R7 M460’s clock speed and architecture make it the stronger performer. This card is best suited for mobile or compact systems where the x8 bus interface is acceptable and where newer feature support matters more than raw memory throughput.

The AMD FirePro W600 wins in memory-bound and display-heavy workloads. Its 64.00 GB/s bandwidth is 78% higher than the R7 M460’s 36.00 GB/s, which is a decisive advantage for tasks that stream large datasets or require frequent texture fetches. The FirePro W600 also has more shading units (512 versus 384), more TMUs (32 versus 24), and more ROPs (16 versus 8), which boosts its pixel rate to 12.00 GPixel/s. This makes it more capable for fill-rate-limited scenarios. The FirePro W600’s 6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs and x16 bus interface also make it a natural fit for multi-monitor workstation setups. Its single-slot form factor, 75 W TDP, and lack of power connectors simplify installation in professional systems. The FirePro W600’s 0.2% margin over the AMD Radeon HD 6950 shows it holds its own among older high-end parts, but its 36th percentile ranking indicates it is not a top-tier performer by modern standards.

In summary, the R7 M460 is the overall benchmark winner, but the FirePro W600 is not obsolete — it simply excels in different domains. The R7 M460 suits compute-oriented, API-forward tasks, while the FirePro W600 serves memory-hungry, multi-output professional environments. The 6.3% benchmark gap is real, but the FirePro W600’s bandwidth and display capabilities are compelling for its intended use case.