
FirePro W4300 vs Radeon Pro WX 4150

FirePro W4300
Popular choices:

Radeon Pro WX 4150
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 W4300 is positioned at rank 168 and the Radeon Pro WX 4150 is on rank 155, so the Radeon Pro WX 4150 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar FirePro W4300
Performance Per Dollar Radeon Pro WX 4150
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FirePro W4300 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.9% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon Pro WX 4150.
| Insight | FirePro W4300 | Radeon Pro WX 4150 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.9%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.9%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The FirePro W4300 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the FirePro W4300 holds the technical lead. Priced at $50 (vs $120), it costs 58% less, resulting in a 147% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | FirePro W4300 | Radeon Pro WX 4150 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+147%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($50) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($120) |
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 W4300 and Radeon Pro WX 4150

FirePro W4300
The FirePro W4300 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in December 1 2015. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 930 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,719 points.

Radeon Pro WX 4150
The Radeon Pro WX 4150 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 1 2017. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1002 MHz to 1053 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,642 points.
Graphics Performance
The FirePro W4300 scores 2,719 and the Radeon Pro WX 4150 reaches 2,642 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FirePro W4300 is built on GCN 2.0 while the Radeon Pro WX 4150 uses GCN 4.0, both on 28 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 768 (FirePro W4300) vs 896 (Radeon Pro WX 4150). Raw compute: 1.428 TFLOPS (FirePro W4300) vs 1.887 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro WX 4150).
| Feature | FirePro W4300 | Radeon Pro WX 4150 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,719+3% | 2,642 |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | GCN 4.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 768 | 896+17% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.428 TFLOPS | 1.887 TFLOPS+32% |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 48 | 56+17% |
| L1 Cache | 192 KB | 224 KB+17% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FirePro W4300 | Radeon Pro WX 4150 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (FirePro W4300) vs 1 MB (Radeon Pro WX 4150) — the Radeon Pro WX 4150 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | FirePro W4300 | Radeon Pro WX 4150 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (FirePro W4300) vs 12 (12_0) (Radeon Pro WX 4150). Vulkan: 1.2.170 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 6 vs 4.
| Feature | FirePro W4300 | Radeon Pro WX 4150 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12 (12_0) |
| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.3+8% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 6+50% | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 2.0 (FirePro W4300) vs VCE 3.4 (Polaris) (Radeon Pro WX 4150). Decoder: UVD 4.2 vs UVD 6.3. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (FirePro W4300) vs H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Decode Only) (Radeon Pro WX 4150).
| Feature | FirePro W4300 | Radeon Pro WX 4150 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 2.0 | VCE 3.4 (Polaris) |
| Decoder | UVD 4.2 | UVD 6.3 |
| Codecs | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 | H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Decode Only) |
Power & Dimensions
The FirePro W4300 draws 50W versus the Radeon Pro WX 4150's 50W — a 0% difference. The Radeon Pro WX 4150 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro W4300) vs 350W (Radeon Pro WX 4150). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 71°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | FirePro W4300 | Radeon Pro WX 4150 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W | 50W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 171mm | — |
| Height | 69mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 71°C-5% | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 54.4+3% | 52.8 |
Value Analysis
The FirePro W4300 launched at $379 MSRP and currently averages $50, while the Radeon Pro WX 4150 launched at $300 and now averages $120. The FirePro W4300 costs 58.3% less ($70 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 54.4 (FirePro W4300) vs 22.0 (Radeon Pro WX 4150) — the FirePro W4300 offers 147.3% better value. The Radeon Pro WX 4150 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2015).
| Feature | FirePro W4300 | Radeon Pro WX 4150 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $379 | $300-21% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $50-58% | $120 |
| Performance per Dollar | 54.4+147% | 22.0 |
| Codename | Bonaire | Baffin |
| Release | December 1 2015 | March 1 2017 |
| Ranking | #590 | #620 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
















