GPU Comparison

The AMD Radeon HD 8690M and AMD FirePro W4100 are both GCN 1.0-era parts, but the benchmark data shows they are not interchangeable. In the only shared benchmark, the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Radeon HD 8690M wins decisively, posting a score of 6137 against the FirePro W4100’s 5478. That is a 12% lead for the mobile Radeon, a significant margin that flips the expected hierarchy given the FirePro’s larger die and workstation branding. However, the FirePro W4100 counters with a Vulkan score of 6496, a test the Radeon HD 8690M does not appear in, and it matches the Radeon’s overall percentile ranking closely. The data suggests the Radeon is the raw compute winner in OpenCL, while the FirePro offers broader API coverage and a different physical profile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single head-to-head result is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon HD 8690M outperforms the AMD FirePro W4100 in Geekbench OpenCL by 12%. The Radeon scores 6137, while the FirePro W4100 trails at 5478. This is not a marginal edge; it is a clear victory for the mobile part, which achieves this despite having fewer shading units (320 vs. 512) and a narrower memory bus (64-bit vs. 128-bit). The Radeon’s higher clock speeds, 925 MHz base and 975 MHz boost, partially explain the gap, as the FirePro W4100’s clock data is not listed in the pack.

The FirePro W4100 does not go unanswered, however. It holds a Geekbench Vulkan score of 6496, a result that has no counterpart for the Radeon HD 8690M. In the OpenCL test, the Radeon’s 12% advantage is its only head-to-head win, giving it a 1-0 record in direct comparisons. The FirePro’s average benchmark score across all tests is 5987, which sits lower than the Radeon’s 6137, but the Vulkan result shows the FirePro can exceed that average in a different API.

Context from the nearest rivals reinforces the split. The Radeon HD 8690M sits at the 36th percentile of all GPUs, with an average score of 6137. Its closest competitor, the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200, scores 6117, a mere 0.3% behind. The NVIDIA RTX A400 and GeForce MX230 are both 1% behind at 6078 and 6077, respectively, while the AMD Radeon HD 6950 is 1.2% ahead at 6210. The FirePro W4100, at the 34th percentile, averages 5987, with the NVIDIA Quadro K4000M matching it almost exactly (5986, 0% delta). The Quadro K4000 is 0.1% behind, and the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server is 0.2% ahead. In short, the Radeon edges out a cluster of modern low-end parts, while the FirePro trades blows with older workstation GPUs.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 8690M wins decisively with a score of 6137, which is 12% higher than the AMD FirePro W4100’s 5478.

Q: Does the AMD FirePro W4100 have any benchmark where it outperforms the Radeon HD 8690M?

A: Yes, the FirePro W4100 records a Geekbench Vulkan score of 6496, a test that has no result listed for the Radeon HD 8690M, so it cannot be directly compared in that API.

Q: How do the two GPUs rank against all other GPUs in the database?

A: The Radeon HD 8690M is at the 36th percentile, while the FirePro W4100 is at the 34th percentile. The Radeon’s average benchmark score is 6137, versus 5987 for the FirePro.

Q: What is the closest rival to the AMD Radeon HD 8690M?

A: The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 is the closest, with an average score of 6117, just 0.3% behind the Radeon’s 6137.

Q: What is the closest rival to the AMD FirePro W4100?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M is the closest, with an average score of 5986, a 0% difference from the FirePro’s 5987.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both list DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170 in their API support.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on AMD’s GCN 1.0 architecture, but they use different chips and have distinct physical footprints. The Radeon HD 8690M uses the Sun chip, which is a 28 nm part fabricated by TSMC. It packs 690 million transistors onto a 56 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.3M per mm². The FirePro W4100 uses the Cape Verde chip, also 28 nm and TSMC-fabricated, but it is substantially larger: 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, with a density of 12.2M per mm². The FirePro’s die is more than twice the size, but its density is nearly identical, indicating a similar design philosophy scaled up.

The core configurations differ sharply. The Radeon HD 8690M has 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 8 render output units (ROPs). The FirePro W4100 doubles the ROPs to 16, raises TMUs to 32, and increases shading units to 512. Despite this 60% increase in shader count, the FirePro’s FP32 throughput is only marginally higher: 645.1 GFLOPS versus 624.0 GFLOPS for the Radeon. This is due to clock speeds, as the Radeon’s 925 MHz base and 975 MHz boost give it a per-clock efficiency edge, while the FirePro’s clocks are not listed in the data.

Memory architecture also diverges. The Radeon HD 8690M uses a 64-bit bus with 32.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the FirePro W4100 uses a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth, exactly double. Both have 2 GB of GDDR5 memory and a 1000 MHz memory clock (4 Gbps effective). The pixel and texture rates reflect the FirePro’s broader setup: 10.08 GPixel/s and 20.16 GTexel/s, versus the Radeon’s 7.800 GPixel/s and 19.50 GTexel/s. The FirePro’s ROP advantage is clear in pixel rate, but its texture rate lead is slim.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs diverge on several key specification fields. The chip is different: Sun for the Radeon HD 8690M, Cape Verde for the FirePro W4100. Transistor count is 690 million versus 1,500 million, and die size is 56 mm² versus 123 mm². The Radeon has explicit clock speeds (925 MHz base, 975 MHz boost), while the FirePro’s base and boost clocks are not listed. Memory bus width is 64-bit for the Radeon and 128-bit for the FirePro, leading to bandwidth of 32.00 GB/s versus 64.00 GB/s.

Compute resources differ: shading units are 320 vs. 512, TMUs are 20 vs. 32, and ROPs are 8 vs. 16. Pixel rate is 7.800 GPixel/s vs. 10.08 GPixel/s, texture rate is 19.50 GTexel/s vs. 20.16 GTexel/s, and FP32 is 624.0 GFLOPS vs. 645.1 GFLOPS. The FirePro W4100 lists a TDP of 50 W, a single-slot width, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 250 W; the Radeon HD 8690M has none of these fields populated. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x8 for the Radeon and PCIe 3.0 x16 for the FirePro. Display outputs are absent for the Radeon but are 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 on the FirePro. The FirePro measures 171 mm (6.7 inches) in length and 69 mm (2.7 inches) in height; the Radeon’s dimensions are not listed. Release dates differ: 2013-02-28 for the Radeon, 2014-08-12 for the FirePro.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but nuanced conclusion. For raw OpenCL compute, the AMD Radeon HD 8690M is the superior part, delivering a 12% higher score than the AMD FirePro W4100. Its 36th percentile ranking and average score of 6137 put it ahead of the FirePro’s 34th percentile and 5987 average. If the sole criterion is Geekbench OpenCL performance, the Radeon wins outright.

However, the FirePro W4100 is not without justification. Its Vulkan score of 6496 shows it can outperform its own OpenCL result in a different API, and that test has no Radeon equivalent in the pack. The FirePro also offers double the memory bandwidth (64.00 GB/s vs. 32.00 GB/s) and double the ROPs (16 vs. 8), which are significant for display-oriented workloads. Its PCIe 3.0 x16 interface and four mini-DisplayPort outputs make it a more flexible workstation card, while the Radeon’s x8 interface and unlisted outputs suggest a more limited mobile integration.

The verdict depends on the workload. For compute-heavy OpenCL tasks, the Radeon HD 8690M is the pick. For Vulkan-based workloads or multi-display professional use, the FirePro W4100’s feature set and API coverage make it the more complete package, despite its lower OpenCL score.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon HD 8690M wins in OpenCL compute benchmarks. Its 6137 score beats the FirePro W4100’s 5478 by 12%, and its average benchmark score of 6137 is higher than the FirePro’s 5987. It also holds a higher percentile ranking (36th vs. 34th). The Radeon achieves this with fewer shading units (320 vs. 512), suggesting its higher clocks (925 MHz base, 975 MHz boost) are more impactful than raw shader count in this test. For users running OpenCL-accelerated applications, the Radeon is the data-backed choice.

The AMD FirePro W4100 wins in Vulkan-specific performance and in hardware configurability. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 6496 is its best listed result, and there is no Vulkan score for the Radeon to contest it. The FirePro’s 128-bit memory bus provides 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth, double the Radeon’s 32.00 GB/s, which benefits memory-intensive tasks. Its 16 ROPs and 10.08 GPixel/s pixel rate are superior for display rendering, and the four mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs enable multi-monitor setups that the Radeon cannot match (no outputs listed). The FirePro’s PCIe 3.0 x16 interface also offers more host bandwidth than the Radeon’s x8. For Vulkan gaming or professional display work, the FirePro W4100 is the stronger option.