
FirePro M4170 vs FireStream 9250

FirePro M4170
Popular choices:

FireStream 9250
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The FirePro M4170 is positioned at rank 196 and the FireStream 9250 is on rank 340, so the FirePro M4170 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar FirePro M4170
Performance Per Dollar FireStream 9250
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The FirePro M4170 is significantly newer (2015 vs 2008). The FirePro M4170 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The FireStream 9250 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FirePro M4170 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.3% higher G3D Mark score and 300% more VRAM (4 GB vs 1 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the FireStream 9250.
| Insight | FirePro M4170 | FireStream 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.3%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / TeraScale (2005−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+300%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The FireStream 9250 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the FireStream 9250 holds the technical lead. Priced at $49 (vs $80), it costs 39% less, resulting in a 62.8% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | FirePro M4170 | FireStream 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+62.8%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($80) | ✅More affordable ($49) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of FirePro M4170 and FireStream 9250

FirePro M4170
The FirePro M4170 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in April 23 2015. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 825 MHz to 900 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,168 points.

FireStream 9250
The FireStream 9250 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 16 2008. It features the TeraScale architecture. The core clock speed is 625 MHz. It has 800 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,165 points.
Graphics Performance
The FirePro M4170 scores 1,168 and the FireStream 9250 reaches 1,165 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FirePro M4170 is built on GCN 1.0 while the FireStream 9250 uses TeraScale, both on 28 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 384 (FirePro M4170) vs 800 (FireStream 9250). Raw compute: 0.6912 TFLOPS (FirePro M4170) vs 1 TFLOPS (FireStream 9250).
| Feature | FirePro M4170 | FireStream 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,168 | 1,165 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | TeraScale |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 800+108% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6912 TFLOPS | 1 TFLOPS+45% |
| ROPs | 8 | 16+100% |
| TMUs | 24 | 40+67% |
| L1 Cache | 96 KB | 160 KB+67% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FirePro M4170 | FireStream 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The FirePro M4170 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the FireStream 9250 has 1 GB. The FirePro M4170 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | FirePro M4170 | FireStream 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+300% | 1 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (FirePro M4170) vs 10.1 (FireStream 9250). Vulkan: 1.2 vs N/A. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 1.
| Feature | FirePro M4170 | FireStream 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12+19% | 10.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | N/A |
| OpenGL | 4.6+39% | 3.3 |
| Max Displays | 3+200% | 1 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 1.0 (FirePro M4170) vs None (FireStream 9250). Decoder: UVD vs UVD 2.0. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (FirePro M4170) vs H.264,VC-1 (FireStream 9250).
| Feature | FirePro M4170 | FireStream 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 1.0 | None |
| Decoder | UVD | UVD 2.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 | H.264,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The FirePro M4170 draws 150W versus the FireStream 9250's 150W — a 0% difference. The FireStream 9250 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro M4170) vs 350W (FireStream 9250). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 234mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs Unknown.
| Feature | FirePro M4170 | FireStream 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 150W | 150W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | 234mm |
| Height | 0mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C | Unknown-100% |
| Perf/Watt | 7.8 | 7.8 |
Value Analysis
The FirePro M4170 launched at $200 MSRP and currently averages $80, while the FireStream 9250 launched at $999 and now averages $49. The FireStream 9250 costs 38.8% less ($31 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 14.6 (FirePro M4170) vs 23.8 (FireStream 9250) — the FireStream 9250 offers 63% better value. The FirePro M4170 is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2008).
| Feature | FirePro M4170 | FireStream 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $200-80% | $999 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $80 | $49-39% |
| Performance per Dollar | 14.6 | 23.8+63% |
| Codename | Opal | RV770 |
| Release | April 23 2015 | June 16 2008 |
| Ranking | #838 | #840 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













