FirePro M4000 vs Radeon PRO WX 9100

Place in the ranking	177	693
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	11.33	no data
Power efficiency	9.60	8.66
Architecture	GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code name	Vega 10	Chelsea
Market segment	Workstation	Mobile workstation
Release date	10 July 2017 (7 years ago)	27 June 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$1,599	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores	4096	512
Core clock speed	1200 MHz	675 MHz
Boost clock speed	1500 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	12,500 million	1,500 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	230 Watt	33 Watt
Texture fill rate	384.0	21.60
Floating-point processing power	12.29 TFLOPS	0.6912 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	16
TMUs	256	32

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 size	no data	medium sized
Bus support	no data	n/a
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-A (3.0)
Length	267 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Form factor	no data	MXM-A
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin	None

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 type	HBM2	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	16 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	2048 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	945 MHz	1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	483.8 GB/s	72 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 Connectors	6x mini-DisplayPort	No outputs
StereoOutput3D	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (11_1)
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	1.2
Vulkan	1.1.125	1.2.131

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

PRO WX 9100 32.06
+673%

FirePro M4000 4.15

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

PRO WX 9100 12320
+672%

FirePro M4000 1595

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

PRO WX 9100 66605
+1104%

FirePro M4000 5532

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 HD

190−200
+660%

−660%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

8.42

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Metro Exodus	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Valorant	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Dota 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Fortnite	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Metro Exodus	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Valorant	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
World of Tanks	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Dota 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Valorant	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
World of Tanks	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Metro Exodus	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Valorant	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Fortnite	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Valorant	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%

This is how PRO WX 9100 and FirePro M4000 compete in popular games:

PRO WX 9100 is 660% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	32.06	4.15
Recency	10 July 2017	27 June 2012
Maximum RAM amount	16 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	230 Watt	33 Watt

PRO WX 9100 has a 672.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

FirePro M4000, on the other hand, has 597% lower power consumption.

The Radeon PRO WX 9100 is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro M4000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon PRO WX 9100 is a workstation card while FirePro M4000 is a mobile workstation one.

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