FirePro W4170M vs ATI FirePro M7740

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro M7740 and FirePro W4170M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

ATI M7740
2009
1 GB GDDR5, 60 Watt
2.11

W4170M outperforms ATI M7740 by a significant 27% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking860800
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.44no data
ArchitectureTeraScale (2005−2013)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameM97Opal
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date4 August 2009 (15 years ago)23 April 2015 (9 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores640384
Core clock speed650 MHz825 MHz
Boost clock speedno data900 MHz
Number of transistors826 million950 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)60 Wattno data
Texture fill rate20.8021.60
Floating-point processing power0.832 TFLOPS0.6912 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs3224

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizelargemedium sized
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed846 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth54.14 GB/s64 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAcceleration-+

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX10.1 (10_1)12 (11_1)
Shader Model4.16.5 (5.1)
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.12.1 (1.2)
VulkanN/A1.2.170

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD16−18
−31.3%
21
+31.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
Battlefield 5 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−44.4%
12−14
+44.4%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−16.7%
21−24
+16.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−20%
12−14
+20%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−5.6%
35−40
+5.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
Battlefield 5 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−44.4%
12−14
+44.4%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−16.7%
21−24
+16.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−20%
12−14
+20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−16.7%
14−16
+16.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−5.6%
35−40
+5.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−44.4%
12−14
+44.4%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−16.7%
21−24
+16.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−20%
12−14
+20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−16.7%
14−16
+16.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−5.6%
35−40
+5.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Hitman 3 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
−33.3%
16−18
+33.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 1−2
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

This is how ATI M7740 and W4170M compete in popular games:

  • W4170M is 31% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the W4170M is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • W4170M is ahead in 41 test (73%)
  • there's a draw in 15 tests (27%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.11 2.68
Recency 4 August 2009 23 April 2015
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm

W4170M has a 27% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The FirePro W4170M is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro M7740 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


ATI FirePro M7740
FirePro M7740
AMD FirePro W4170M
FirePro W4170M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


5 1 vote

Rate FirePro M7740 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 24 votes

Rate FirePro W4170M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.