AMD FirePro W4170M vs AMD Radeon HD 8750M Comparison

The AMD Radeon HD 8750M and the AMD FirePro W4170M are two mobile GPUs built on the same foundation: both come from AMD, both use the GCN 1.0 architecture, and both were fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process with 950 million transistors packed into a 77 mm² die, giving an identical transistor density of 12.3M per mm². Despite that shared silicon-level DNA, the database shows meaningful differences in clocks, memory subsystems, and measured performance. The recorded head-to-head benchmark favors the HD 8750M by a clear margin, while the FirePro W4170M counters with a substantially faster memory configuration and double the video memory. This analysis walks through the measurements step by step and explains where each card holds the advantage.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a single recorded head-to-head test between these two GPUs, but it is a decisive one. In the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark, the Radeon HD 8750M scored 5970 against 5034 for the FirePro W4170M, an 18.6 percent advantage for the HD 8750M. That is not a marginal win within measurement noise; it is a gap large enough to place the two cards in different neighborhoods of the performance ranking.

The percentile data reinforces this. The HD 8750M sits at the 34th percentile versus all GPUs in the database, while the FirePro W4170M lands at the 30th percentile. Both are entry-level positions, but the four-point percentile gap matches the direction and rough scale of the benchmark result. The overall tally in the database stands at one win for the HD 8750M and zero for the FirePro W4170M.

Context from each card's nearest rivals clarifies the picture further. The HD 8750M's score of 5970 places it in a cluster of professional-class competitors: the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 averages 5982, only 0.2 percent above it, while the NVIDIA Quadro K620M averages 5957, 0.2 percent below it, and the AMD Radeon HD 8730M sits at 5955, 0.3 percent behind. The NVIDIA Quadro K4000M, at 5986, is just 0.3 percent ahead. In other words, the HD 8750M trades blows almost exactly evenly with a tightly packed field.

The FirePro W4170M's neighborhood is populated by different company. Its nearest rivals are all AMD parts: the Radeon R5 M430 at 5018 (0.3 percent below), the Radeon R7 M340 and Radeon R7 240, both at 5063 (0.6 percent above), and the Radeon R7 Graphics at 4998 (0.7 percent below). These are lower-scoring parts overall, which confirms that despite being the newer product, the W4170M's measured compute performance sits below the HD 8750M's.

Architecture Differences

At the architectural level, the two GPUs are strikingly similar, and the differences that matter are in implementation rather than design. Both use GCN 1.0, both were built by TSMC on a 28 nm node, and both carry 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die. The core counts are identical too: 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 render output units on each card. Neither GPU has RT cores or tensor cores, as expected for this era of hardware.

The chips themselves differ. The HD 8750M is based on the Mars chip, part of the Solar System generation (HD 8700M), with London as its predecessor and the Gem System as its successor. The FirePro W4170M uses the Opal chip, belonging to the FirePro Mobile (Wx100M) generation, with FirePro Mobility preceding it and Radeon Pro Mobile following. The launch dates are also far apart: the HD 8750M was released in February 2013, while the FirePro W4170M arrived in April 2015.

Clocks are where implementation begins to diverge. The FirePro W4170M runs a base clock of 825 MHz with a boost of 900 MHz, while the HD 8750M operates at a 775 MHz base and an 825 MHz boost. The W4170M therefore holds a consistent clock advantage of 75 MHz at both base and boost levels. This translates directly into higher theoretical throughput: the W4170M delivers 691.2 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, 7.200 GPixel/s of pixel fill rate, and 21.60 GTexel/s of texture fill rate, against 633.6 GFLOPS, 6.600 GPixel/s, and 19.80 GTexel/s for the HD 8750M.

Memory is the other major dividing line, and here the W4170M's advantage is dramatic. It carries 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, clocked at 1000 MHz for an effective 4 Gbps, yielding 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The HD 8750M pairs its 128-bit bus with 1 GB of DDR3 running at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), producing just 28.80 GB/s. That is a bandwidth difference of more than a factor of two in favor of the FirePro, plus double the memory capacity. The database also records a notable physical difference: the W4170M is an MXM module with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs, while the HD 8750M has no slot width or power connector data recorded.

Both cards share the same software interface profile: PCIe 3.0 x8 bus, DirectX 12 (feature level 11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both are end-of-life products.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in benchmarks?

A: The Radeon HD 8750M. It scored 5970 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 5034 for the FirePro W4170M, an 18.6 percent lead, and it holds the higher percentile position, 34 versus 30.

Q: Do the two GPUs share the same architecture and process?

A: Yes. Both are GCN 1.0 designs built by TSMC on 28 nm, with 950 million transistors, a 77 mm² die, and 12.3M transistors per mm². They also share identical core counts: 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs.

Q: Which card has better memory?

A: The FirePro W4170M, clearly. It has 2 GB of GDDR5 delivering 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth, compared to 1 GB of DDR3 delivering 28.80 GB/s on the HD 8750M, both over a 128-bit bus.

Q: How does the FirePro W4170M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: It sits at the center of a tight AMD cluster: 0.3 percent above the Radeon R5 M430 (5018), 0.6 percent below the Radeon R7 M340 and R7 240 (both 5063), and 0.7 percent above the Radeon R7 Graphics (4998).

Q: Which GPU has higher clocks and theoretical compute?

A: The FirePro W4170M. Its 825/900 MHz base/boost clocks exceed the HD 8750M's 775/825 MHz, giving it 691.2 GFLOPS FP32 versus 633.6 GFLOPS.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No. Both are listed as end-of-life in the database. The HD 8750M launched in 2013, the FirePro W4170M in 2015.

The Verdict

The recorded data points in a specific direction. If measured compute performance is the priority, the Radeon HD 8750M is the pick: it wins the only head-to-head benchmark in the database by 18.6 percent and holds a four-point percentile edge over all GPUs. It performs on par with the Quadro K4000, Quadro K620M, Quadro K4000M, and Radeon HD 8730M, all within a fraction of a percent.

If memory capacity and bandwidth are the priority, the FirePro W4170M is the stronger choice despite its lower benchmark score. Its GDDR5 subsystem delivers 64.00 GB/s against 28.80 GB/s, and its 2 GB frame buffer doubles the HD 8750M's 1 GB, which matters for workloads that exceed a 1 GB memory footprint. It also offers higher clocks and higher theoretical peak rates across FP32, pixel, and texture fill. Note that the benchmark deficit comes in spite of those superior theoretical numbers, a discrepancy the single recorded test cannot fully explain.

Both cards carry identical API support and bus interfaces, so software compatibility is not a differentiator here. Neither is currently in production.

Specification Differences

• Chip: Mars (HD 8750M) vs Opal (FirePro W4170M)
• Generation: Solar System (HD 8700M) vs FirePro Mobile (Wx100M)
• Release date: February 2013 vs April 2015
• Base clock: 775 MHz vs 825 MHz
• Boost clock: 825 MHz vs 900 MHz
• Memory size: 1024 MB vs 2 GB
• Memory type: DDR3 vs GDDR5
• Memory speed: 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) vs 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective)
• Memory bandwidth: 28.80 GB/s vs 64.00 GB/s
• Pixel rate: 6.600 GPixel/s vs 7.200 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 19.80 GTexel/s vs 21.60 GTexel/s
• FP32 compute: 633.6 GFLOPS vs 691.2 GFLOPS
• Slot width: not recorded vs MXM Module
• Power connectors: not recorded vs None
• Display outputs: not recorded vs Portable Device Dependent
• Predecessor: London vs FirePro Mobility
• Successor: Gem System vs Radeon Pro Mobile

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon HD 8750M wins on measured performance, full stop. Its 5970 Geekbench OpenCL score is 18.6 percent above the W4170M's 5034, it ranks at the 34th percentile versus 30, and it competes evenly with a field including the Quadro K4000 and Quadro K4000M. For general GPU compute workloads reflected in the database's testing, it is the demonstrably faster card even with slower memory and lower clocks.

The FirePro W4170M wins on memory-bound potential and capacity. With more than twice the bandwidth (64.00 GB/s versus 28.80 GB/s), double the memory (2 GB versus 1 GB), and higher peak clocks, it is the better positioned card for scenarios where a workload is limited by memory throughput or needs to hold more than 1 GB of data. Its MXM module format with no power connectors also makes it a mobile-workstation-class part by design, and its position within a cluster of Radeon R5 and R7 mobile parts indicates the entry-level segment it actually competed in according to the recorded data.