AMD FirePro W4170M vs AMD Radeon HD 8790M Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 8790M leads with an average benchmark score of 5691, while the AMD FirePro W4170M trails at 5034. This puts the HD 8790M at the 33rd percentile among all GPUs, versus the FirePro's 30th percentile.

Q: Do these two cards share the same chip design?

A: Yes, both use the same 28 nm process from TSMC, with 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die. Their transistor density is identical at 12.3M / mm². The difference lies in the chip names: the HD 8790M uses "Mars," while the FirePro W4170M uses "Opal."

Q: How do they compare in memory specifications?

A: They are identical: both feature 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, with 1000 MHz memory clocks (4 Gbps effective) and 64.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the single head-to-head benchmark result?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the FirePro W4170M scores 5034 versus the HD 8790M's 5017, giving the FirePro a narrow 0.3% advantage. This is the only direct comparison in the database, and the FirePro wins it.

Q: How do their nearest rivals compare?

A: The HD 8790M's closest rival is the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 (5712, 0.4% behind the AMD card). The FirePro W4170M's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R5 M430 (5018, 0.3% behind the FirePro). The FirePro sits in a lower performance tier overall.

Q: What are their production statuses and release dates?

A: Both are end-of-life products. The HD 8790M was released on March 31, 2013, while the FirePro W4170M came later, on April 22, 2015.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows a clear split. The AMD Radeon HD 8790M wins on raw average performance. Its average benchmark score of 5691 is 13% higher than the FirePro's 5034. In the OpenCL test, however, the FirePro W4170M edges ahead by 17 points (5034 vs 5017), a 0.3% margin. This suggests the FirePro has a slight optimization for compute workloads, despite its lower overall standing.

The HD 8790M also wins on Vulkan, where it scores 6365. The FirePro has no recorded Vulkan score in the database, so the HD 8790M is the only choice for Vulkan-based applications. For users prioritizing OpenCL compute, the FirePro's narrow win indicates it may handle certain workloads marginally better. For everything else, the HD 8790M's higher average score and broader API support make it the stronger pick.

The percentile rankings reinforce this: the HD 8790M sits at the 33rd percentile, while the FirePro is at the 30th. This places the HD 8790M in a slightly higher performance bracket, near the Intel Iris Pro P6300 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670MX. The FirePro, by contrast, aligns with lower-tier chips like the Radeon R5 M430 and R7 M340.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on GCN 1.0 architecture, which is the same foundation. The process node is identical: 28 nm at TSMC, with 950 million transistors. The die size matches at 77 mm², and the transistor density is the same. This means the underlying compute design is essentially unchanged between the two.

The chip names differ: Mars for the HD 8790M, Opal for the FirePro. These are different physical chips, but they share the same core counts and feature set. Both have 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. The API support is identical: DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

The generation labels differ. The HD 8790M belongs to the "Solar System (HD 8700M)" generation, while the FirePro is part of the "FirePro Mobile (Wx100M)" line. This reflects their intended market segments: consumer mobile gaming versus professional mobile workstations. The predecessor and successor names also differ: the HD 8790M follows "London" and leads to "Gem System," while the FirePro follows "FirePro Mobility" and leads to "Radeon Pro Mobile."

The key architectural takeaway is that the silicon is the same in terms of compute resources. Any performance differences stem from clock speeds and bus interface choices, not from fundamental design changes.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge in several measurable fields, though many specs are shared. Here are the differences:

• Base clock: HD 8790M runs at 850 MHz, FirePro at 825 MHz. The HD 8790M has a 3% higher base clock.
• Boost clock: Both hit 900 MHz, so no difference there.
• Bus interface: HD 8790M uses MXM-A (3.0), FirePro uses PCIe 3.0 x8. This affects how the card connects to the motherboard.
• Release date: HD 8790M launched on March 31, 2013; FirePro on April 22, 2015.
• Generation: HD 8700M series versus FirePro Mobile Wx100M series.
• Chip name: Mars versus Opal.
• Predecessor and successor: London/Gem System versus FirePro Mobility/Radeon Pro Mobile.

All other key specs are identical: 2 GB GDDR5, 128-bit bus, 64.00 GB/s bandwidth, 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, 8 ROPs, 7.200 GPixel/s pixel rate, 21.60 GTexel/s texture rate, and 691.2 GFLOPS FP32. Both are MXM modules with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs. Neither has a TDP listed or a launch MSRP.

These differences are modest. The higher base clock gives the HD 8790M a small theoretical edge in sustained workloads, while the FirePro's PCIe 3.0 x8 interface may offer better host connectivity in some laptop platforms.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records one direct comparison: Geekbench OpenCL. The FirePro W4170M wins with a score of 5034 against the HD 8790M's 5017. The delta is 0.3%, which is within measurement noise. This result indicates that the two cards perform essentially identically in OpenCL compute tasks, with the FirePro holding a razor-thin advantage.

The HD 8790M has an additional benchmark: Geekbench Vulkan, where it scores 6365. The FirePro has no Vulkan score recorded. This means the HD 8790M is 26% faster in Vulkan than the FirePro is in OpenCL, but that comparison is not apples-to-apples. The more relevant point is that the HD 8790M supports Vulkan with a strong result, while the FirePro's Vulkan performance is unmeasured.

Looking at average scores, the HD 8790M's 5691 is 13% higher than the FirePro's 5034. This larger gap comes from the Vulkan score lifting the HD 8790M's average. In pure OpenCL, the two are neck and neck. The HD 8790M's nearest rivals cluster around 5712 to 5731 (Intel Iris Pro P6300, GTX 670MX, GTX 550 Ti), all within 0.7% of its average. The FirePro's rivals are lower, from 4998 to 5063, with deltas of 0.7% or less.

The data suggests that if a workload uses Vulkan, the HD 8790M is clearly superior. If it uses OpenCL, the choice is effectively a coin flip, with the FirePro holding a negligible lead.

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon HD 8790M is the stronger overall performer. Its average benchmark score of 5691 places it 13% ahead of the FirePro W4170M's 5034. It also holds a higher percentile rank (33rd vs 30th) and offers a Vulkan score of 6365, which the FirePro cannot match. Users who need Vulkan support or want the best general-purpose mobile GPU from this pair should choose the HD 8790M.

The AMD FirePro W4170M wins the only direct head-to-head test: Geekbench OpenCL, 5034 to 5017. This 0.3% margin is tiny, but it indicates that the FirePro is slightly better optimized for OpenCL compute. For professional applications that rely heavily on OpenCL, the FirePro may be the safer pick, especially given its later release date of 2015 versus 2013.

The two cards share identical memory, shading units, TMUs, ROPs, and pixel/texture rates. The HD 8790M's higher base clock (850 MHz vs 825 MHz) gives it a theoretical edge, but the FirePro's PCIe 3.0 x8 interface could offer better data transfer in some systems. Neither card has a TDP or MSRP listed, so power and cost comparisons are not possible from the data.

In short: pick the HD 8790M for broader API support and higher average performance. Pick the FirePro W4170M if your workload is strictly OpenCL and you trust the 17-point advantage in that specific test. The data favors the HD 8790M overall, but the FirePro is not without its niche.