AMD FirePro W4190M vs AMD Radeon R7 250E
Comparative analysis of AMD FirePro W4190M and AMD Radeon R7 250E videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD FirePro W4190M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 10 month(s) later
- Around 3% higher core clock speed: 825 MHz vs 800 MHz
- 2x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1 GB
- Around 16% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3889 vs 3355
- Around 16% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3889 vs 3355
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 12 November 2015 vs 20 December 2013 |
Core clock speed | 825 MHz vs 800 MHz |
Maximum memory size | 2 GB vs 1 GB |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3889 vs 3355 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3889 vs 3355 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R7 250E
- Around 19% higher texture fill rate: 25.6 GTexel / s vs 21.6 GTexel / s
- Around 33% higher pipelines: 512 vs 384
- Around 19% better floating-point performance: 819.2 gflops vs 691.2 gflops
- Around 13% higher memory clock speed: 4500 MHz vs 4000 MHz
- 2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 582.073 vs 284.018
- Around 55% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.2 vs 1.417
- Around 69% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2873 vs 1704
- Around 46% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3698 vs 2529
- Around 69% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2873 vs 1704
- Around 46% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3698 vs 2529
Specifications (specs) | |
Texture fill rate | 25.6 GTexel / s vs 21.6 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 512 vs 384 |
Floating-point performance | 819.2 gflops vs 691.2 gflops |
Memory clock speed | 4500 MHz vs 4000 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 582.073 vs 284.018 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.2 vs 1.417 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2873 vs 1704 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3698 vs 2529 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2873 vs 1704 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3698 vs 2529 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD FirePro W4190M
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R7 250E
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | AMD FirePro W4190M | AMD Radeon R7 250E |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1155 | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 179 | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 23384 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 284.018 | 582.073 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.417 | 2.2 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1704 | 2873 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2529 | 3698 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3889 | 3355 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1704 | 2873 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2529 | 3698 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3889 | 3355 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 21.562 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 38.669 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 98.052 | |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD FirePro W4190M | AMD Radeon R7 250E | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 1.0 | GCN 1.0 |
Code name | Opal | Cape Verde |
Launch date | 12 November 2015 | 20 December 2013 |
Place in performance rating | 1073 | 1075 |
Type | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
Launch price (MSRP) | $109 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 900 MHz | |
Core clock speed | 825 MHz | 800 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 691.2 gflops | 819.2 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 384 | 512 |
Texture fill rate | 21.6 GTexel / s | 25.6 GTexel / s |
Transistor count | 1,040 million | 1,500 million |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 55 Watt | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Laptop size | medium sized | |
Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
Length | 168 mm | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 12.0 (11_1) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 1 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 64 GB / s | 72 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 4000 MHz | 4500 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
AppAcceleration | ||
Enduro | ||
Powerplay |